Gandhi – the Characterization

To understand Gandhi is a tricky exercise. He was unlike other political thinkers, philosophers and strategists not just because he lacked a definitive set of theory colluded with strange and vacillating principles but also because he held unusual objectives in his mind which often made his public-private life distinction seem to be obscure. Over the years following his assassination, hagiographic accounts created a larger than life image of Gandhi which associate the now popular and text-bookish ideas of Satya, Ahimsa, Non-Cooperation and Civil-Disobediences with him. These ideas, indisputably, were crucial part of the Gandhian way of life however it is a gross error to understand Gandhi as a person by analysing these Gandhian socio-political constructs. In my view, Gandhi’s humility is the crucial lynchpin between his simple yet complex character. I have tried, like many others, to empathize with Gandhi from a self-devised framework but have failed miserably in my attempts to cement together his inconsistencies. Reading Gandhi’s accounts and texts one wonders at the unfazed manner in which he wrote, seemingly detached yet anxious. His ideas continue to evolve with time. He appears as a man who is ever engaged into conversations, primarily with himself, to better understand what he really wants. His personality confounds me because of his eccentric behaviour that makes him difficult to comprehend. Why is he sometimes unusually cold - even with his closest kith and kin - and at other times, outrageously emotive so much that he forgets to take rest even for a second? The likes of M. Chatterjee and A. Sharma describe him as a spiritual seeker who is ever searching, in an odd mixture of passion and detachment, his way ahead in life. Evidently, at times reason can fail to make sense out of a selfless oriental seeker whose personality is largely driven by metaphysical concepts and interests, which lay beyond the conventional boundaries of rationality. A psychoanalytic point of view explains his adult personality as a sort of defence mechanism towards fighting and escaping his childhood guilt and fears.

Methods = Means?

The method of Non-Violent Passive Resistance or Satyagraha is interesting in many ways. Branded by many as anarchic, sometimes even as political blackmail, this was a tool newly invented which helped India to foster its Independence struggle. However, its importance must not stem out of the extent of its success in delivering the Indian freedom fighters with the objectives that they had aimed originally. Going by that logic it failed miserably, when applied 50 years later in 1971 during the Bangladesh war of liberation by East Pakistanis with Awami League leading the vanguard against West Pakistan - eventually leading to brutal crackdown of demonstrators by Pakistani Air-Force and Army. Clamped down with LMGs and artillery fire on major East Pakistan cities, it broke into a violent civil war between Pakistani Army and rebel guerrilla forces demanding emancipation and resulting in the death of around 3 lakh civilians. Satyagraha worked in one case but failed in other. The above small example is important to understand that for Gandhi this is precisely the point. He did not choose a method because it harboured possibility to work and succeed. He seems to be not concerned with the final result of his methods instead his prime focus was the methods themselves. For those who were of the opinion that - means were after all means – for them Gandhi had an answer – means were everything. These methods were not means employed to achieve specific goals, even if Congress and people by and large perceived them to be such. They were instead a way of personal life extended into the larger public domain. More on this later.

Gandhi, Ramana Maharishi and Advaita

Gandhi calls himself an Advaitin. One wonders by what parameters he qualifies as such. Advaita literally means non-dualism. There are texts available which command their authority over the philosophy of Advaita; Shankaracharya’s being the major ones. However to define Advaita or any such attempts goes fundamentally opposite to what Advaita stands for. At most, it can be felt or realized. Ramana maharishi stands as an exemplar personality who lived by the philosophy of Advaita as a Jivanmukt. However, Ramana’s life in many ways was diametrically opposite to Gandhi’s. While the Jivanmukt lived a strange disinterested life, Gandhi was a very active and emotional man. But if there is one commonality in both of them, then it’s their perplexing and unpredictable mind.

The perplexity of non-dual reality

Sound divorced from meaning or the other way round, will result in absurdity. It will not contain any information. For humans, information lies in language, which is a distinctive combination of sound and meaning. So information exists only in the presence of a combination of sound and meaning with a human to perceive it.

For an Advaitin there is no distinctness between himself and a bowl. Why so? The answer lies in knowing the origins of distinction. Separation, the word, the concept and its meaning only exists in the framework of language and thought. Outside it, it is hard to imagine its existence. An Advaitin will realize otherness only if he will come to think or speak of it, on employment of thought or language. To address the metaphysical concepts of Advaita with limited faculties of rationality will only create illusions and that is why an Advaitin will never employ dialectics to understand reality. For an Advaita, the non-dual reality can only be felt when the mind is free from the vice grip of reason and language. A mind detached from worldly affairs can best experience it.

Having no way to know what a real Advaitin would be, can we assume that Gandhi is sincere when he says that he is an Advaitin too? Yes, sincere he is, for he does not come out as a man who would give such a public statement just in jest. Everything he does, more than explaining the reason to do it to others, he seems to explain it to himself. So much so that often after deeply pondering he sometimes admits to have believed incorrectly originally and later corrected himself after having seen the light of the day. Such as his view that Truth is God. But is he really an Advaitin? For the sake of our understanding, keeping Ramana maharishi in mind, can we say that he is an Advaitin in making? An Advaitin like Ramana will harbour strikingly different outer and inner views, which unlike conventionally are strangely aligned with each other. Outer view is the same as or emerges out of the inner view. Outer view is the outlook and behaviour towards the external world. When a devotee asked him, does God exist, he replied in return, who is asking the question? This simple answer from the Advaitin explains that there is no separation unless we ask and create one. Who is asking the question, is a food for thought for the questioner to ponder deep within and ask him/herself that who am I and why do I ask and create the illusion of separateness? Inner view is the thought within one’s mind. Ramana would avoid, rather be disinterested in all such thoughts which would create the illusion of duality. There is a continuum from the inner to the outer. The absence of duality and a certain ignorance of language and thought. Internal mental setup is extended to the external behaviour. The private life is carried into the public domain. Or in other words, in consistency to the main philosophy, the distinction between private and public is a myth. They are one and the same.

Model of Politics

At this juncture, we seem to identify the similarities in Gandhi and Ramana. Let’s say, Gandhi holds on to a private life which is disciplined, rigorous in habits and checked by vows. But, he seems to be training himself, for a larger aim and his training extends into the public domain as well. Coming of age leadership experiences in South Africa shaped him into a confident, curious and mature person from a much afraid, reticent and diffident youth. Steady spiritual realizations offered him to think about the wider transcendental mysteries of the world around him. This larger aim seems to be his quest to take control of himself and live a rediscovered righteous life. Satya and Ahimsa are much deeper feelings and recognitions that his humane heart learns to harbour for the whole world around him. His Satya, the feeling of identifying what was just in a situation and then being true to follow one’s inner voice was a universal principle applied in an absolute manner to everything without any exemption. Ahimsa was his belief in universal empathy and love. Satya and Ahimsa go deep as universal Justice and Love, which Gandhi seems to accept as fundamental to universal service. It is hard to see where Advaita fits in this. However, one explanation is Gandhi’s unquestioning dedication to empathize with everything around, with his failure to identify any difference between man and man coupled with nearly obstinate will to challenge and destroy all thoughts that make one believe in distinctions. Never hate the man, hate the intention. This intention is the illusion which divides man from man.

Gandhi’s ways are as much private as they are public. It is hard to find Gandhi ever retreating into an unknown private domain hidden from people around. His engagements with politics are more of a symptom than the cause themselves. The main cause is his lifestyle, curious to ask and question, to care and provide, and to live righteously and maintaining this tempo unaffected by external factors in a detached manner. He is a self-trained man serious about his practices, which are beyond the language of private and public. He holds to his intention of taking full control of his life with sheer fortitude and discipline. This is coupled by what A. Sharma recalls as his quality of putting praxis before theory that makes him the ideal karmayogi of Indian scriptures. The beauty and perhaps curse of Gandhi’s personality is the sheer sincerity and depth of his beliefs yet uncertain character of its ability to bring change.  

Gandhi's religious thought (review part-3)

Truth

Chatterjee mentions how truth has always had a role to play in various Indian systems of thoughts like Hinduism, Jainism and Buddhism. It was used as a blanket cover for several spiritual pursuits, yogic practices and meditative techniques. In such a backdrop, Gandhi’s experiments with truths become interesting because he has his own ways of ascesis. She mentions how at a later stage in his life he discovers that God is Truth. He is not substituting Truth for God but is in fact trying to elucidate what God means for him. Gandhi has very peculiar views on religion. As Chatterjee mentions, he believes in idolatry and is also an iconoclast, which means his God does not have a perceptible image but at the same time he is reflected in the faces of starving millions. Gandhi mentions verses from the holy Koran, reads passages from the Sermon on the Mount and this also not for nothing. Several times he has received criticism for such ventures and so many times he was taken to task by his fellow Hindus. How can we forget that a fellow radical Hindu took his life? But the point nevertheless remains that he borrowed and absorbed from wherever he could look. He educated himself into developing a religio-ethical creed. A theory which is humanistic and practical first and anything else later. Gandhi was also close to atheists and Chatterjee recounts the incident when he attended the funeral of Charles Bradlaugh whom he admired very much. Gandhi saw in atheists, a will to enquire and search for truth. They rejected sentimental and metaphysical arguments on rational grounds and he saw a thrust for truth in them.

Another reason, on similar lines, why Gandhi preferred to see his God in the absolute truth is because time had proved that in every religion, the mere word God appeared as the biggest stumbling block. The word itself weaves debates around it and very often the essence of religion is lost in these debates. Gandhi didn’t want to engage in this God-talk and was rather impatient with those who were only interested into talking religion and not acting. Truth solved such problems.

This calls for understanding the meaning of Truth. Gandhi’s understanding finds its resonance in the Upanishads. The TaittirIya Upanishad says that ‘Brahman is truth eternal.’ For Gandhi, truth is the absolute Brahman. In the Sabarmati Ashram evening prayers would include the BhajanAvalI and one of the hymns said: ‘Early in the morning I call to mind that Being which is felt in the heart, which is sat (the eternal), chit (the knowledge) and ananda (the joy). Truth was sat existing beyond and unconditioned by space and time. Gandhi once quoted from Mahabharata: ‘There is no dharma other than Truth.’ Satyam eva jayate nanRtam means Truth is victory not falsehood. For Gandhi Truth was not the path to salvation, it was salvation. He saw the whole Hindu tradition was a relentless pursuit after truth.

His methods of this pursuit are interesting. There’s a distinct element of Advaita in it. He understands the whole species of humans, animals and nature as one. Moreover as Chatterjee observes later that this is actually one and the only inconsistency that we can observe in Gandhi- he is a believer in one world one people and at the same time he’s a nationalist fighting for independence and sovereignty. He believes that men should rationalize their needs so that everyone receives his due share. The needs have to be decreased when so many people sleep at night without even one morsel of bread in their stomachs. He calls for vegetarianism because eating non-veg is an act of ahimsa towards animals. Similarly water must be saved because at some places women have to walk miles to get just one bucket of not very clean water. His self-discipline is actually an inculcation of God-ward proclivities. This is a certain kind of ethical behaviour true to the atman inside.

In Gandhi’s mArg of truth, the tapasya, a series of disciplines is necessary. This mArg overlaps very considerably with the Jain list of vratas or resolutions. These are Ahimsa (non-violence), Nidarta (fearlessness, truth), Brahmacharya (chastity), Asteya (non-stealing) and Aparigraha (non-possession). He also pays a lot of attention to means rather than ends and often quoted a famous adage ‘as you sow so shall you reap.’ Gandhi advocates a strict steadfastness in their enforcement upon the people he led. He borrowed the scrupulous discipline present in nature like the sequence of day and night, cycle of seasons and saw them not as mechanical but as a model for human activity. He was of the view that before being send on campaigns, the satyagrahis had to be trained in the above mentioned resolution with the same steadfastness as shown by nature. Gandhi believed that discipline was utmost important and that the vows were important not so much to control the tempest raging within us but more so as they were a sign of strength. It was not a formalistic framework to keep oneself on rails but a way of entering more deeply into the truth.

Lastly Chatterjee mentions what words Gandhi used to represent the untruth. Gandhi says the nApAk (unholy), Satanism, evil, adharma, irreligion and deadly sins were untruth and that a Satyagrahi, a genuine seeker of truth must have a heart as hard as granite to fight against them.

SUFFERING

  

Suffering plays a very important role in Gandhi’s scheme of things. Before proceeding to Gandhi’s views, Chatterjee has explained the traditional Indian outlook attached to the idea of suffering – dukkha. In the Indian metaphysics as well as religions, dukkha has always been considered as a chief practical problem. Hinduism holds the concept of rebirth where the endless cycle of birth and death with ceaseless dukkha appears as a horrifying prospect. However, Gandhi held an innovative view on suffering, which he considered to be the richest treasure of life. He did not see dukkha from a Hindu cosmic point of view but from a very human and practical point of view. He saw suffering in the form of the injustices inflicted upon the weak and the wickedness present in the human heart such as the emotions of anger, greed, lust etc. However, he was not talking about this form of suffering only. More importantly he was concerned about the suffering which was self-inflicted- known as tapasya. Tapasya was the marg for tackling the above-mentioned miseries.

Gandhi focused on two things. First, tapasya should not be a method which only the spiritually strong sannyasins can adopt but it should also be achievable by all. Second, while it would enable the common man to build up a good life it must also be an effective weapon against the prevalent suffering. Gandhi looked for a method through which the constructive energies of all men could be released. He believed non-violence to be that method, the tapasya. The moral equivalent of warfare. Gandhi believed that the reality must be changed but non-violently otherwise the total burden of suffering in the world would increase. Non-violence was voluntary adoption of suffering by an individual and a group as a self-purificatory act to set up an example for others and convert the heart of the oppressor. He puts self-sacrifice in the place of ancient YagNas. This sacrifice was not the individual suffering undertaken through austerities in quest for self-perfection. Instead, this was the combined heroism of groups of satyagrahis.

Regardless of all, Gandhi repeatedly said that this method was new and yet to be tested. He believed that the suffering undertaken through the path of non-violence was not just to rectify the injustices inflicted upon common people or only making the authority concede to righteous demands but also to win the heart of the opponent and establish with him a new human relationship.

In matters of training Satyagrahis Gandhi paid utmost importance to discipline. To those, he led, he commanded with the wisdom of a spiritual dictator. Non-violence was not just to be observed in physical terms but also in terms of thought. Gandhi knew that the teachings of self-suffering can be put to use only after necessary preliminary training and he had the knack for sensing the readiness of Satyagrahis for embarking on a particular campaign.

Gandhi also said that each should find his salvation within his own community. This view might appear contradictory since Gandhi exhorted groups of satyagrahis rather than individual suffering. The contradiction is solved when we understand that Gandhi was asking everyone, all members of the group, to first clean their own houses. As an example, he meant that while untouchables must non-violently defy Brahmin edicts like, not using a certain road expecting reprimand in return-suffering- they must also improve their own lives by observing cleanliness, spinning etc.

Chatterjee goes on to argue that independent observers might not find Gandhi’s strategy of using suffering that effective a tool. It might simply appear as a kind of political blackmail. However, she clarifies this doubt by invoking the images of violent struggles of history which include assassinations, hostages, guerrilla strategies, isolated acts of terrorism and innocent people getting killed. Gandhi’s strategy of non-violent suffering was not political blackmail because he made sure that proper preliminary training of self-purification was given to the satyagrahis before they would be embarked on a campaign. The self-suffering was eventually supposed to move the heart of the oppressor, hridaya-parivartana. If it could not be done then it was better to get killed than kill, apparently to fail than to submit to tyranny. Such a method were satyagrahis were ready to lay their lives for the truth was not political blackmail.

Chatterjee explains that the method of self-suffering would not always be useful and effective unless the parallel constructive works are also run. Gandhi was extraordinarily sensitive to timings of campaigns because he believed that the voluntary assumption of suffering cannot be justified in the absence of supporting constructive work.

Chatterjee also suggests that using ahimsa and dukkha together, Gandhi has created a certain kind of enlightened anarchism. One wonders that if non-violent suffering is used as a tool against authority of the day then who will justify its enlightenment. Gandhi was both a spiritual dictator and an epitome of self-sacrifice which gave his enlightenment the required legitimacy. However, ordinary men are not like Gandhi and if today the method is used then how will it qualify as enlightened? We must realize that devoid of enlightened the method is just another form of anarchism.

SECULARISM

As Chatterjee talks about religion, inner voice and Gandhi’s spiritual pursuits to train satyagrahis, she does not miss the important problem of religion getting mixed with public life and the response that Gandhi’s critics give to it. For Gandhi, secularism was never a problem neither was the presence of more than one religion. He saw similar ethical and human concerns in all religions. Pluralism was never an intellectual problem for Gandhi. Moreover, anyone with a Jain background and training in Syadvad would take this plurality for granted.

To understand more deeply why Gandhi had inter-religious beliefs is to understand the kind of pursuit on which Gandhi was moving. As mentioned earlier by Chatterjee, his was a relentless pursuit of truth. He was not a pioneer labouring on theological frontiers because the frontier mentality was alien to him whether on fronts of religion or geography. He also had a knack to relate and find his own convictions reflected in whatever he was reading. Chatterjee points to the fact that Gandhi had some deep rooted convictions and things that he read only made them much stronger. Ideas such as civil disobedience by H.D.Thoreau and life of labour by John Ruskin were some examples. Wherever he found these ideas, he wholeheartedly accepted them regardless if they crossed religious boundaries. In his thoughts, commitment to common ethical values was in no way incompatible with the diversity of religious belief.

As mentioned earlier, one and perhaps only contradiction in his scheme of things was to believe in one world one government and at the same time in nationalism. Unity of mankind and nationalist aspirations didn’t go hand in hand. However, he explained that the unity was based on our common imperfections which all men have. A microcosm form of this unity and coexistence was mentioned by him in his speeches like this: all men must acquire the wisdom of a Brahmin the fighting spirit of a Kshatriya the business acumen of a Bania and the spirit of service of a Sudra.

We can see his application of these cross religion beliefs in so many forms. One of the examples is his disapproval of materialism. He was against rapacious acquisitiveness mainly for two reasons, one emerges out of Swami Vivekananda’s Advaita view that this acquisition of wealth and material is unequal which would lead to some people being discriminated vis a vis to others. The other reason stemmed out from Ruskin’s notion of life of labour. If machines would dominate the market then labour will be displaced which would be disastrous in a country where God resides in the faces of so many labouring men and women.

In India, public and social lives have been different. There was never an Indian parallel to the proletarian pop culture in the west that accompanied along with it secularization. In India, Chatterjee mentions, there was a continuity between beliefs and religious practices in India’s villages for hundreds of years. Politics for Gandhi was a mission, not any art, business or a game as Tilak one put it and Gandhi would use all his religious knowledge no matter where it came from to purge out the dirt. He also believed that Gita has shown that there are multiple paths to attain the highest truth of all. Politics was also a human activity which is built into man’s community and there was nothing wrong to walk on it and purifying it by infusing a non-violent spirit into it. Gandhi thought that activism of religion, when it is purged of obscurantism, superstition and doctrinal barriers, was to bring about conflict resolution as it had in itself the seed of sensitivity to social injustice. This quality made religion an integral part of politics.

Chatterjee also mentions about Gandhi’s dislike for any kind of compartmentalization. To divide religion on the basis of doctrines and sacraments was another form of fragmentation which Gandhi could not accept. His Advaita beliefs prevented him from engaging in any form of partitions. He believed in the whole, unity of one.

Although Secularism was not a serious issue for Gandhi, and he involved cross religion thoughts freely in the field of politics, he also received a lot of flak for it. Occasionally he read passages from the holy Koran as in 1947 which brought a shower of criticism on his head. He was called a slave of Jinnah-Saheb and a fifth columnist. He was also taken to task by students of Gujarat National College when he read some passages from the New Testament. These incidents show that although Secularism had entered Indian public discussion or perhaps it was infused from west but Gandhi did not pay much importance to it ever. His thoughts and beliefs worked on a different plane situated much higher. He paid the price to Godse. 

Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi- the saint of action

Gandhi emerged as an exceptional political strategist with an unconventional personality. He took an active interest in the lives of people and community at large which made him a man of politics albeit a very peculiar one. This is because he didn’t work within the traditional paradigm of politics. He was not systematic at all. He did not follow the traditional rules of politics. People defy political orders and histories of every country are a living testimony to it. People resist with all strength and anger. But Gandhi’s lesson of defiance was different. He said, ‘one can disobey only if there’s scope to obey, but in our case there’s no question to obey anything.’ His disobedience had an element of detachment. This is the important juncture where he juxtaposed the spiritual with the practical. The detachment stemmed out of the spiritual and the spiritual out of religion. This shall be my aim- to understand how Gandhi reconciles religion with politics.

First look at his qualities will present a plethora of contradictions. Such as Religion and Politics; a combination that every modern nation wants to shy away from. Secularism is the motto of the day. But Gandhi enforced that politics must be reformed through religion. In my opinion, he even believed that politics is an outgrowth of religion. More contradictions- he was ideal and romantic but also realistic and shrewd. Believed in universal equality but still accepted the castes and Varnashrama Dharma. However after reading more and understanding him better I realized that Gandhi understood these ideas from a standpoint where they were not contradictions at all. Gandhi justified how idealism will go hand in hand with realism, how equality and freedom will go hand in hand with caste duties and how politics was a subset of religion. He also admitted that his views may become inconsistent with the time, but that was also justified in his system of things.

To understand this extraordinary personality and how he cultivated himself, we must understand his scheme of things, his influences and his objectives- immediate and long term.

Let us for a moment not look at Gandhi as the Mahatma or a politician who fought for our independence but instead as a middle class boy born and brought up in a traditional religious Gujarati family belonging to the Bania (Merchant) caste. If we read his autobiography we will find the early sources of his religious leanings. Ladha Maharaj, a friend of his father would often visit his home to read Tulsidas’ Ramayana and young Gandhi often listened with rapt attention. He was exposed to Jain beliefs through his mother’s contacts. Very soon, he came in contact with Raychandbhai, a Jain philosopher, who later became his spiritual guide during his years in South Africa. He was very impressed by the teachings of Bhagavad Gita and went so far to translate them. His western influences were John Ruskin’s ‘Unto this last’ which mainly discussed the Sermon on the Mount and Tolstoy’s ‘Kingdom of God is within you.’ ‘Offer the other cheek also if someone slaps you,’ repeated Gandhi very often from the Sermon. He was also influenced by folk traditions, stories, and hymns, especially that of Narsinh Mehta’s. The Bhagavad Gita and the philosophy of Advaita Vedanta had the most significant influence on him. The retelling of these influences is very important because they had been instrumental in shaping Gandhi’s thoughts.

From a psychological point of view, I am trying to understand the way in which Advaita Vedanta of Gita and Upanishads, the Jain, folk and epic literary texts had shaped his mind and thoughts. His own individual endeavours to train himself with vows and forced discipline were equally instrumental. But I see that even his self-training was an outcome of religion. He was training himself to be a seeker. What was he seeking? Later. Once we understand his thoughts, we would see why he was unlike ordinary men and women and did not qualify as any traditional politician. We will also see how he observed the world around him and will get justifications of his actions in his private spheres like relations with his wife, sons and extended family friends and in public life which were mostly political and social in nature.

What was Gandhi interested in? Were these interests political in nature? Did he have any self-interests?

Gandhi was a religious man and he believed that he was only a humble servant of the Lord of the universe. The Bhagavad Gita had taught him the theory of Nishkan-karma which meant to be simultaneously in a state of action and detachment both. In Gita, Krishna told Arjun that he was a Karmayogi therefore he must follow his Dharma. Gandhi also took himself to be a karmayogi - the humble servant of the Lord- who had to pursue his dharma. But before proceeding we must understand the meaning of these terms and the central concept of Advaita around which all of them are woven.

Gandhi thought in a certain way that subscribed to the school of non-dualism. He was aware of the Atman present in each and every person, animal and objects of nature. He was also aware of the universal Brahman that existed independently. ‘Brahma is the imperishable supreme aspect of God and Adhyatama is the individual soul living in the body of all beings as the doer and the enjoyer,’ [1]he said. He asserted the Advaita when he said ‘the supreme state of Brahma is reached by sages who have freed themselves from the likes and dislikes by observing Brahmacharya.’[2] Gandhi was of the view that humans were perfectible and that the Atman could reach the universal Brahman. Bhagavad Gita gave ample evidence of this perfectibility by presenting Krishna as the mortal who carried the Supreme God within him. In Bhagavad Gita, Krishna said, ‘the man of vision (who loves me, does my bhakti) and I are one. His whole soul is one in me and I am his supreme path.’[3] Gandhi’s views on human perfectibility were also corroborated by his belief in the Jain ideal of Syadvad. These views were formed mostly by staying in touch with Raychandbhai. Syadvad means the presence of multiplicity of individual truths. Everyone holds fast their own truths and they are false only if they are considered to be exclusive. Syadvad believes that the universal truth is the collective whole of all the individual truths. This is similar to saying that the Atman is the truth within and the universal Brahman is the ultimate truth. One must hold fast to his individual truth and seek towards the ultimate truth. Gandhi believed that the journey from Atman to Brahman can take place only when the ego within is extinguished and we served ourselves humbly to the universal lord. The seeker must pursue the absolute.

Back to the first question. Why did he seek at all? What were his interests? Does this absolute truth also mean Moksha?

At this important point we must understand that Gandhi was not seeking the absolute truth out of any interests. He was seeking it as a duty. Why? Because in the affairs of mortal life a karmayogi must follow his dharma, which in the Upanishadic sense means right conduct or righteous duty. Just as Arjun finally decided to fight for righteousness when Krishna exhorted him to follow his dharma, Gandhi decided to follow his dharma which was his duty to pursue the absolute truth or the universal God. He did not questions this and performed it with a sense of detachment, the nishkam-karm. Moksha comes later. We must first understand the nature of this universal God, in Gandhi’s scheme of things.

Gandhi gave his own interpretation to the God of Gita. He called him the Daridranarayan or the God of the weak. Borrowing from Advaita, he saw the absolute Brahman as a collective of individual Atmans of all people. This was similar to Vivekananda’s interpretation and explained the etymology of the word Harijan. ‘God lives in the starving millions,’ he said many a times. The 3 supreme ideas mentioned in Bhagavad Gita are of Gyan (Light), Bhakti (Love) and Karma (Life). As mentioned above, Krishna said in Gita that the supreme Lord could be attained only by doing his bhakti. Since Gandhi’s God resided in people he did the bhakti of the masses by dedicating his karma towards them.

So far we have understood that Gandhi as a seeker was pursuing the absolute truth (ultimate Brahman) because a karmayogi must follow his dharma. Dharma dictates righteous duty, which in turn means complete dedication to the Lord Almighty- ultimate Brahman. The Lord resided in the weak so dharma dictated complete devotion to the service of the destitute. We should also look at his ways to serve God, the starving millions.

Gandhi was a Hindu but he accepted the religion in a selective manner. He did not blindly followed all sacraments and tenets. He went so far to say that those Vedas which asked for sacrifices and indicated towards subjugation of the weak must be ignored. He paid immense importance to the Jain ideals of Brahmacharya, Aparigraha, Satya, Asteya and Ahimsa and very craftily added them into his scheme of things which was originally inspired from the wisdom of Gita and stories from the epic literatures of India namely Ramayana and Mahabharata. For him these ideals were instrumental in serving the poor. He invoked the element of pity, daya from Bhagvad Gita as crucial for this service. His favourite hymn ‘Vaishnav jan to tene kahiye je, peed paraayi jaane re’ originally written by Narsinh Mehta means Vaishnava (devotees of Lord Vishnu) people are those who feel the pain of others. He was a staunch believer of reincarnation, which is a central tenet of classic Hinduism but was of the opinion that he wanted to be born again and again to serve the weak endlessly. This was his definition of serving and dedicating himself forever to the lord almighty. We can see that these ideas emerge out of Bhagvad Gita but Gandhi shaped them in a certain way that suited his understanding of dharma- duty to the Lord. This makes me remark on the beauty of the Bhagavad Gita and its ability to be interpreted by the seeker for what he or she is looking for.

Moksha for Gandhi was complete liberation from any impure thoughts. Any deviance from the route of serving others was an impediment to Moksha. To immerse oneself into dharma, the right conduct, one’s own truth of serving the almighty lord with Anasakti- selfless action, would lead to Moksha. Gandhi wanted to be born again and again so that he can serve the people endlessly and this was Moksha for him. Jain influences made him see life in all beings. Gandhi saw in each being a small part of the Brahman. For him all was sacred so he enforced Ahimsa with all his might. ‘Love your neighbour as your God’. This was his idea of Loksangraha, a collective effort for universal brotherhood. He taught Ahimsa not just in physical aspect but also in spirit. Even a thought of ill-will would broke the principle and was an aberration from Moksha.

He was a karmayogi who wanted to follow his dharma to serve others with detachment and bhakti for endless time. He believed in teaching through setting example. He never forced anyone, but exemplified the life of a karmayogi with tenacious will and determination. He believed that if everyone lived their lives as karmayogis then the human civilisation would set up the Kingdom of God right here on earth. The Advaita reinforced itself again and again as reflected in this thought. Earth and Heaven were same. This was his concept of Ram-Rajya.

---

[1] Discourses on the Gita- Mahatma Gandhi Chapter 8.

[2] Discourses on the Gita- Mahatma Gandhi Chapter 8.

[3] Bhagvad Gita- Chapter 7 Verse 18.

Je Suis Charlie

Before even going into the what-a-bad-act-of-violence sentimental outpour I want to focus first on the meaning of Secularism as interpreted and enshrined by the Constitutional Council of France. The idea of this article is not to analyse whether it was a bad and horrific action or a good and justified reaction. Certainly there are causes responsible for an action. In fact Mr. Devdutt Patnaik goes so far, although not very impressively, to give a philosophical bend to the recent attacks by talking about maya: we live in our constructed realities smothered by the maya which makes us the killer and the killed both. One can always throw in more constructed jargons like Justice by arguing that 12 people lampooning prophet get killed in cold blood in France by two isolated militants and 3.7 million people come out in their support but 2000 plus innocent people including children and pregnant women are captured in their own homes in Nigeria and butchered for committing no crime by an army of organised militants and still only a handful of news agencies talk about the incident. Call it the ridiculousness or mishandling to deal with global terror outfits or the absurdity of modern day realpolitik one cannot but be compelled to frown at these incidents. These are matters of grave concern which make us rethink our basis concepts of justice, freedom, peace, tolerance, security and allegiance to basic humanism and simply commenting that it was good or bad would be gross oversimplification.

The text-book definition of Indian secularism is that the government shall remain neutral to all religion by not meddling itself into the affairs of any single one of them. Free practice, profession, propagation (of) your religion (conversion although is not a right as said by SC in one verdict and de facto conversion by force is infringement of freedom of conscience), freedom from taxation (on religious institutions), freedom to give religious instructions (to autonomous private education institutions), freedom to manage language and culture (religious minority) are some provisions mentioned under part-3 of Indian Constitution also called as ‘Fundamental Rights’. Pretty impressive isn’t it? In theory, yes. But this is not the case in France.

In France, Secularism simply means concerning with the affairs of natural and not the supernatural. The French state does not recognize religion and recent past incidents would also show that there’s a certain element of hostility against religion in their secularism. The French accepted the concept of Laïcité – the separation of church and state way back in 1905. However the more severe version of secularism was defined by the French courts recently in 2004. Increasing amount of immigration in the past decade gave way to the emergence of multiple identities. To prevent the practice of appeasement politics, which destroys social fabric – India being a fantastic example, the decision was taken to identify secularism as a strict non-recognition of any religion. This essentially means that the people of France have the right to offend religion just as they can other sensitive matters like public figures. In 2011 they passed a law for mandatory revelation of face at places of work, officially banning Hijabs and Naqabs. This came into implementation since 2014.

Charlie Hebdo was practicing this legal and political facility to express its disagreement of institutionalised religion, specifically Islam as per the context. Certainly the fact that they didn’t express why they disagreed with Islam but straight away lampooned it as a joke is questionable. Charlie’s belief is that rather than pouring in over the top militarised troops into the middle-east, they should instead create such an atmosphere of liberal thought that Islam like Christianity is reduced to a banality. Despite several threats and some previous attacks, Charlie did not succumb. Theirs was a provocative, thoughtful, funny, obscene and an anarchist method.

Most important now is to understand the socio-political implications of these attacks on Charlie Hebdo. Anti-immigration sentiments are high in European nations. Whether they are anti-Islam marches in Germany or the rising Islamophobia in France, one must clearly understand the backlash that Charlie Hebdo will create.

Clearly there were reported attacks on Mosques and other Islamic centres which only corroborate the rising fear of Islam in European countries. These are not isolated incidents. The growing immigration compounded by an anti-Islam sentiment has been further responsible for alienating the Muslim communities in European countries. This has caused ghettoization and marginalisation. I even heard Mr. Bobby Jindal recently talked about certain no-non Muslim zones in England where a more severe form of Islam is strictly followed. The idea is that if one reads the profile of majority of Muslim people living in these areas, one would find that these are 2^nd and 3^rd generation immigrants from marginalized working classes living in grim high rise suburbs at the outskirts of large cities where unemployment, drug exploitation and other crimes plague day in and day out. Such marginalisation and unemployment brings along dejection and stigma with it, which if can be solved by joining a radical Islam then the latter is considered a viable option. Such reasons which provide a meaning to these despondent men and women then become an explanation to incidents of young people flocking in groups to join radical forces in Middle-East like IS.

Charlie Hebdo and its aftermath must be treated very sensitively. The government and law enforcement agencies must work hard to keep all the sections of people in confidence and ensure their ideal of secularism in practice.

Nirmal Ganges

Few days back I had a discussion with a friend about religion. We discussed about its presence in today’s post-modern multicultural world and about its essence and consequences, some favourable and some not so favourable for maintaining a peaceful social order. We came to a realization that regardless of everything else, religion is an outstanding psychological construct made by us to conveniently tackle the unseen, unheard and complex gaps of life. However this construct comes with its own set of vulnerabilities which have time and again been exploited and used against us. Today, so many issues have arisen out of mere interpretational differences of religions such as IS and jihad, Israel-Palestinian conflict, self-acclaimed Godmen like Rampal, Muslim and Christian beheadings by Bodu Bala Sena~Buddhists (sic). When religion teaches the world about morality, it also takes its fee in the form of lives that is has consumed.

At a personal level I maintain that religion contains several internal conflicts. However it also has a brilliant psychological tool which can tackle all these conflicts very easily. [Whoever created religion, knew about the insecurity and the sense of loneliness with which people live in this huge dark cosmos. This source who created religion removed this loneliness by giving humans what they were looking for; God and his adobe of light. One who cares about humans, one who won’t let them be alone and most importantly, one who’ll be waiting to embrace them in his arms after they die and give them salvation]. This tool is called faith. It works by making you ignore empirical (and logical facts) and believe in a divine external agency working for a higher purpose in their stead. An example of this is “Nirmal Ganga”.

Friedrich Nietzsche, in Beyond Good and Evil said that it’s hard to be understood, especially when one thinks and lives like Gangastrotogati (the mighty currents of river Ganga) among those who think and live like frogs. Here it should be noted that a man as critical in views as Nietzsche uses river Ganga as a simile to define the life of his Ubermacht (The Superman), who lives outside the herd (of blind sheep) and creates his own meaning in life. Surely Ganga reflected the might of the Ubermacht way back in 1886. The things have changed since then. These days we hardly find men like Nietzsche or mighty rivers like the Ganges of 1886…

“The Holy River, Ganga mata, as it is called colloquially is dying” says B.D.Tripathi, Ganga Basin Authority. Over the last 2 decades, the river flow has receded to such an alarming level that it has caused enormous amount of siltation. Excessive siltation increases silt deposits due to improper drainage, the river shrinks and disappears slowly. Most importantly its carrying capacity decreases leading to an automatic increase in pollutants and industrial residues. In my opinion there are at least 3 major sources of pollution in Ganga, namely religious leftovers (such as coconuts, immersed ashes, flowers, lamps, used clothes etc.), industrial residue (chemicals, detergents causing white froth, also washed pesticides from farms) and untreated sewage discharge (literally human and animal faeces). I do not have to be a scientist to notice that there is something abnormal going on if we choose to blind eye excreta discharges into a river and still call it holy.

In the light of continuous depreciating condition of the holy river, it is important to look at the steps taken by the government to address and contain these 3 issues.

In 2009, the Honorable Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh established the National Ganga River Basin Authority (NGRBA). It included the PM himself as the chairperson along with the ministers of concerned departments (such as Environment and Forest, Water Resources, Science and Technology etc.) and Chief Ministers of those states through which the river flows (namely Uttarakhand, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Jharkhand and W.Bengal). State Ganga River Basin Authorities (SGRBA) were also established in these states. NGRBA was created after a detailed study and evaluation of the existing Ganga Action Plan on which Rs. 900 crore had already been spent. It then decided to implement a new plan called “Mission Clean Ganga 2009-2014”. MCG’s main objective was to stop all untreated sewage and industrial waste to be released in Ganga by 2020.

MCG was broadly classified in two goals:

·         Nirmal Dhara (Clean flow)

·         Aviral Dhara (Continuous flow)

To fulfil these objectives, NGRBA took 5 steps:

1.        Sanctioned Rs. 6,400 crore for 81 sewage control projects and treatment plants in UP (Rs. 2,700 crore), Bihar (Rs. 1,400 crore), W. Bengal (Rs. 1,200 crore), Uttarakhand (Rs. 250 crore) and Jharkhand (Rs. 100 crore). Created 3,600km of sewage network and treatment capacity of 700 million litres/day.

2.       Prepared a consortium of IITs lead by IIT Kanpur to prepare a Ganga River Basin Management Plan (GRBMP) and enabled legislations to give effect to the provisions of plan.

3.        Declared Ganga Dolphin as the national aquatic animal ~ a symbol for restoration of river’s cleanliness.

4.       Issued notices from Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) to 704 out of 764 heavily polluting industries draining in Ganga, in the critically polluted 730km stretch from Kannauj to Varanasi.

5.        Abandoned 3 hydel projects on upper reaches of Bhagirathi on ecological considerations.

As per these steps taken certain changes have been seen. Now at least Sewage Treatment Infrastructurehas become a priority because 70-75% pollution of Ganga is cause by discharge of untreated Municipal waste. The IIT consortium has already submitted 37 reports and has given to the country the first basin wide approach to river management. Plans have been made to extend such action plans to Yamuna, Sutlej and Musi. At the end of it, implementation and careful study of improving standards will show whether the government has really been successful in containing the degradation or not. But it’s a matter of time.

More importantly, the new Government at centre has been more vocal and active about this issue, which makes it necessary to have a look at their actions.

·         Recently “Namami Ganga” project was announced in this year’s Budget Speech with a fresh allocation of Rs. 2,037 crore.

v  In the recently held 4^th meeting of NGRBA it was decided that the following actions would be implemented right away:

§  Henceforth no sewage drainage system would be allowed to have an outlet into the river at any point of its flow.

§  Existing 144 open drains carrying sewage and industrial effluents would be cleaned.

§  Immersion of cremation ashes will not be allowed at the shallow end of the riverbanks.

§  Flower and coconut offerings will be trapped through a mesh and recycled for making holi colours.

v  Ganga Vahini – ex-servicemen and NGO led vigil groups organised on the lines of Red Cross.

v  River Front management for development and beautification of ghats at Kedarnath, Haridwar, Kanpur, Varanasi, Allahabad, Patna and Delhi.

v  Programmes for afforestation, conservation of flora and aquatic lives have also being initiated.

Prima Facie it appears that the new government is more committed to solve the pathetic condition of Ganga. Their commitment to utilise the initiatives of previous government and at the same time giving effect to innovative implementation does carry a promise to improve conditions of the ailing river. They should be consistent in these efforts and a community led will to contain the present levels of pollution must be shown by the public, which if happens we will surely be able to reignite the mighty flow of this holy rive.

Pakistan rekindled

As dusk approaches, a gentle breeze brushes against passionate countenances of people who have gathered at D-chowk - today charged with adrenaline – all set to welcome the thrilling twilight, scores of which have of lately been capturing the media and imagination of the Pakistani mind. Young girls clad in hijabs, neck-scarves and aviators; some sporting caps and almost all holding netted flags, flags which have been dyed in red and green with a white Crescent and “Tehreek-e-Insaf” scribbled in Urdu. On the top of its voice shouts a man – once a cricketer, now a politician-  in a loudspeaker and out aloud the girls respond:

Loudspeaker: “Dekho dekho kaun aaya” Girls: “Sher ka shikari aaya!”

“Dekho dekho kaun aaya” “Sher ka shikari aaya!”

Loudspeaker: “Kaun Bachayega Pakistan” Girls: “Imran Khan Imran Khan”

“Kaun Bachayega Pakistan” “Imran Khan Imran Khan”

This is only a recapitulation of lately what has been a recurring drama in Islamabad. Local fields swelled up with Pakistani youth and middle class people have been much covered by the media in the past 2 months. As an observer who sits comfortably in his room, I have but little idea of what is brewing inside our neighbouring country. My sources have been news reports and media footages. I am hence only commenting on what I have observed and my opinions regarding it.

The situation stretches back to the 14^th General Elections of Pakistan held in May 2013, which declared the Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz) as the single largest party henceforth making Nawaz Sharif as the new Prime Minister of the 6th most populous nation of the world – Islamic Republic of Pakistan. However contrary to popular sentiments, which hailed these elections to be the most “free and fair” in Pakistan’s history, reporting of large scale rigging soon emerged out. The Election Commission of Pakistan came up with serious allegations of rigging and even mentioned the involvement of returning officers and civil servants in it. Thereafter the anger which was broiling bit by bit in opposition lead by Ameen Faheem’s Pakistan People’s Party and Imran Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf party broke out at last with the members of PTI resigning their membership of Parliament and calling the general public for demonstrations and sit-ups ahead of Parliament and the PM house. The scene depicted at the start of this article mentions one such sit-up.

Several sit-ups followed and scores of people from different shades of Pakistani public attended such gatherings. Pakistan Awami League’s sufi cleric Tahir-ul-Qadri was soon to follow (Imran Khan) and his presence bloated the attendance with more participants, this time his supporters. The masses, as many as 25,000 people, were composed of all and sundry belonging to different classes and opinions; young and old alike they stood for their aims were same- “Nawaz Sharif gaddi chhodo” or “Go Nawaz Go”. The demonstrators faced a heavy blow when few PTI supporters stormed the premises of state news agency PTV and took the services off the air. They had to face police action which lead to 3 casualties. Clashes also took place in front of PM house against which Pakistani Defence Minister Khwaja Asif ordered for selective crackdown. “The writ of the state must be enforced” said Asif. Recent developments have witnessed the emergence of a committee of opposition politicians called jigra (PTI, PPP, PAT) which looks forward to mediate talks between embattled Nawaz Sharif government and the protesters. Also while Nawaz government has conceded all the demands of protesters (~ changes into the election process), it still stands adamant against their penultimate demand of PM’s resignation.

So much for the crash course on history of recent Pakistani turmoil. All said and done, what catches my attention the most are the sit-ups. These were (now strength decreasing) bloated gatherings often with people in quantities as many as 100,000s sitting together to demand Nawaz’s resignation. D-chowk holds most of these gatherings where Imran Khan has taken a temporary shelter in a shipping container. This Cricket star turned politician who is now also addressed as the Punjabi Sher holds the reigns of the demonstrations. Peculiarly enough, he finds it hard to talk except in cricketing metaphors. As soon as the public calms down to listen him speak, he shouts aloud in the mic “Aapke kaptaan me abhi bohot jaan baaki hai!” -“There is still much life left in your captain” or “ye samajhte kyu nahi ki inki innings khatm ho gayi hai aur pavilion jaane ka waqt a gaya hai?”-“Why don’t they get it that their inning has ended and that they’re due to pavilion?” The charismatic leader of PTI (whose election symbol is a cricket bat!) emerges out in the evenings –amidst tunes of pop song Allah Hu Allah Hu- to address his supporters and spends his days travelling and mobilising people.

The grip however is loosening now and gradually people are losing interest. The demonstrations were an expression of anger in the popular mind-set of common people facing wide scale corruption, poor governance, terrorism, failed public service delivery (health, electricity, water, sanitation) so on and so forth. Once the anger is vented out, it gives relief to the mind and people soon lose faith in the demonstrations especially after government crackdowns. Many amongst the demonstrators were young college going men and women, who could not continue to take breaks from their studies for long.

In the wake of negotiations and mediations, the strength of supporters in streets is decreasing continuously thus marking the concluding phase of these undemocratic popular demonstrations. There are more pressing concerns such as Indo-Pak border shelling and ceasefire violations for which Pakistan will have to answer. Under pro-active gestures of friendship and mutual dialogue shown by their Indian counterparts (whether it is invitation to Narendra Modi’s swearing in ceremony or his UN general assembly speech), Pakistan must take a serious stand against terrorism and be equal partners with India to solve the border issue with dialogue and deliberations. This is the right time for us to revoke the biannual Defence Secretary level talks which have been in a state of limbo since some time and respect the sacredness of ceasefire. But for this to take place seriously, Pakistan must soon solve its internal crisis first, even if it demands a re-elections.

Ebola in town

The West Africa Ebola Virus outbreak in Guinea, Sierra Leone, Liberia and Nigeria has consumed more than 1,200 lives with more than 2,200 suspect cases. World Health Organisation has declared the epidemic as an international emergency.

 

1785, Gola Forest, Sierra Leone, group of Kru tribals settle in the woods having recently migrated from Lofa, Liberia. They collect timbers, tubers and hunt Diana monkeys for food. Life has given enough troubles to every member of the clan but now Krus have settled for peace and serenity, which is but temporary in their new habitat. Dumola Muwalu Bukele, the local tribal elder of the Vai tribe is unapproving of the recent Kru developments in his neighbourhood. Krus do not share ethnicity with Vai but they are ferocious and brave although a minority. Vais on the other hand are the deadly hunters and conjurers who on wish can change themselves into demons. Eventually on the night of full moon when Krus are dancing and drinking to celebrate Jacqui - birth of their clan deity, Bukele attacks the settlement. The Vai demons attack with claws, jaws, spears and knives on the unarmed Krus including women and kids. Beaded hair and white decorated Kru faces are reddened with blood and soon the settlement is flooded with dead bodies around the fire. The witch-hunt consumes every single Kru save mother Sherma who says to the demon Bukele:

We came for water, we came for food, we meant no harm, sorghum we brewed.

We didn’t take arms for tonight Jacqui we celebrate, had we picked up our spears, our might we had demonstrate.

You are no demon, you’re just another coward, mark my words for darkness on you shall be showered.

For a time shall come when the beast of the fallen Kru shall arise,

In the dread of the night it will walk with black eyes.

It will eat, it will bite and will wipe your name in mud,

All your men will die and their women will weep blood!

Having cursed Bukele, Sherma, still breathing and the entire settlement was put to fire. As the fire consumed Sherma, Bukele watched her burning and screaming in agony. Soon the screams were muted and silence engulfed the settlement. But unnerved he stood, for Bukele could still see clearly the curse of Sherma still hanging above the ashes.

229 years after her death, the beast has finally arisen.

         

2014, 9:30pm meanwhile in Sierra Leone…

(Donda, Running and panting, speaking to himself) Where are you! Sshhhit! (Breathing heavily) Keep runnin, keep runnin little Donda, almost there! This isn’t real…this can’t be! My God, stop shouting, Edward for Christ’s sake shut up these women!

(Meanwhile women shouting…) Eee Bow Laaa! Eee Boww Laaaa!

Edward: I’m trying my man, they’re excited Donda. Where’re you up to Donda?

Donda: Edy my man, I’m off to report a signature!

(Donda to himself) Keep runnin, keep runnin Donda, you’re almost there! I know the world is spinning, but this ain’t your regular psychedelic smoke, this is lack of air, ma mouth is dry, I’m thirsty and I’m about to fall… (Thud!) I’m down, man down, get up, no let me lay, let me die… at least it’s less painful… (Silence)… The taste of mud, they say it’s salty and its smell… more like my hair… this is heaven. No!! Get up you good for nothing jackass, find the white shirts. This is a task, to fall and die is a direct breach of protocol! My legs are weak but functional still and run I shall, yet again. Keep runnin keep runnin little Donda, there it is, the white van.

Donda to white-shirts: Sir! Sir Hello sir, the… theyr… there’s a signature sir, yes sir, premature.

(Donda contemplating) Then I sit in the white van with the white shirts and we trace back the path that I recently ran past. There yonder pond lies Sister Mary in her hut and we’ll fetch her with doctors, with medics and throw Ebola out’a her. Eee Bow Laaa Eee Bow Laaa vehemently shouts the women of the neighbourhood. This is my small animated locality in western Daru, Sierra Leone and I am 40 year old Ebanahu Donda. I own a meat shop and my neighbours call me little Donda, owing to my little body. White shirts say I do not grow because I shit in open. I believe the white shirts. Our van speeds past bushes on one side and muddy-plastered huts on other side. It’s 2143hrs and there’s no electricity (hardly surprizing) save the orange glows of Naftaada Lamps (kerosene lamps), which the lahai women light up every evening in their small huts for what has become a ritual now. There are rumours that shouting EBOLA aloud will make the disease go so every evening invariably, women flock near the cotton tree and repeatedly shout aloud Eee Bow Laaa! As our van approaches the pond and we dismount the van, white shirts jump out with extreme swiftness and carry Sister Mary inside the van on a stretcher.

White-shirts: “The girl is showing Ebola signatures. We will take her and her father to the treatment facility. Do not enter the premises of this hut. Do not touch anything and women... stop wailing.

(Sffwoosh!) The van drives away in the dark of the night leaving me with animated men and hysterical women. Soon the neighbours retreat to their dingy huts and I can hear the crickets as silence falls. Naftaada lights flicker over my face revealing the dread and tears in my eyes. While I weep, shadows dance on brown mud walls as if mocking my pain, Mary’s pain. And in the shadows I can sense an old women… and her curse.

Donda: Bad… This is very bad, I say.

9:23am next Morning…

(Taka taka dhum!! Sounds of Congo-drum being playing nearby)

(Donda blabbering) I slept whole night outside Mary’s porch? Aah…I am weak... and hungry. My hands… they are so small, calloused and rough. I stink! Where are my shoes? My head is spinning. Aah…Thieves! Hold it Donda, hold it, I am alright, drink some water. Am I colour-blind? Why is everything brown? No wait…there’s something Red. Red and Blue, yes this is the poster that the white-shirts pasted. It reads “Ebola don’ts”. It shows a shitting man and says “don’t defecate in open”. The white-shirts say Ebola spreads through body fluids. Unlike flu virus it doesn’t spread with air. It spreads through Blood, sweat, urine, semen, sneeze and shit!

All hell broke loose since this beast of a disease entered our country. Initially the doctors did not know what they were dealing with in their dilapidated hospitals. Later the white-shirts were deployed in all districts. They wear white Hazmat suits and helmets…thus the name. They look at us from beneath their giant snorkelling masks and dare not touch us without latex gloves. They carry blue buckets filled with Ebola culture, which is transported to treatment facility for finding the cure to the beast. They don’t have the cure yet. Anybody who catches the virus here, does not survive. These white-shirts… (Sad)…they’re working hard but they’re just stalling the imminent end.

(Somewhere near, Radio chatters…BBC Morning Edition, Americans Dr. Kent Brantly and Dr. Nancy Writebol who were infected with Ebola while working in a missionary clinic in Liberia are recovering fast. The duo had been treated with the experimental “chimpanzee adenovirus vector vaccine”. To use the drug in African nations or not is however still an issue of debate…)

(Dhum dhum taka… Congo sound increasing)

Our locality is infested with a moribund state of gloominess. Today there’s no sun. Breeze is cool under an overcast sky.

Donda (shouting in half cracked voice): “Aye Edward! Why’re you squatting o’er there?”

Edward (clad in his favourite Qatar Airways Barcelona jersey): “I’m waiting”

Donda: “You’re waiting! You’ve been squatting over there for over an hour now, whachha waiting for?”

Edward (pensive): “I don’t know! (Pthu…spitting betel-nut juice)”

Edward grins, exposes his few pairs of reddened crocked teeth but soon retreats in contemplation.

(A bunch of drunk boys arguing with the white-shirts)

The white-shirts are having a hard time to convince the boys that Ebola is real. Women believe in it but men don’t. They think women are scared and it’s a political scam to divert international funds. Now the local administration has started printing T-shirts with “Ebola is real” logos. Edward was interviewed yesterday by a team of journalists from Doctors without Borders? It went like this:

Edward to journalist: “Lissen Medem- (Hoarse voice) there’s no Ebola! Take Ebola to Emerica, take Ebola to Britane, no Ebola over here, and no Ebola in me. If I die that’s my right.”

(Donda disturbed and blabbering) If people don’t believe in the disease then they don’t report the signatures and the disease spreads. But I reported Mary yesterday. Oh Jesus what a deadly disease it is! It makes you bleed from inside. Your eyes will bleed, nose, mouth and ears will bleed. Oh God, your skin bleeds from within and large bubbles filled with blood appear on it. It’s an agonizing and painful death. Jesus save us from the curse!

When the reporters were interviewing Edward, Daru was scared. Daru is Edward’s pet monkey, so no one eats it. Nobody eats anybody’s pet, is the unwritten law in the neighbourhood. But everyone eats a wild monkey even if it is diseased. The white-shirts said “stop eating the primates, primates spread Ebola!” Edward reprimanded “(Hoarse voice) the white-shirts want to eat all monkeys, so they stop us”. Bushmeat (Monkey meant or Groundhog meat) is commonly eaten in our country. Everyone prefers monkeys over chicken and fish. White-shirts say “Bat eats fruit, Monkey eats fruit, Donda eats fruit, and Donda catches Ebola” HIV virus spread like this, they say. I used to shout on a loudspeaker and sell a lot of Bushmeat, freshly traded from Lofa forest Liberia. It is protein and is sweet. But now administration has put ban on Bushmeat and police has closed my meat shop. They have instead opened a chimp testing facility in the neighbourhood. Soon Daru will be snatched from Edward

Edward (still squatting motionless).

(Taaka dhum dhum taaka…Congo plays loudly) Eee Bee Oow Ell Aaa! Ebola in town! Don’t touch your friend! No touching! No eating something! It’s dangerous! Ebola… Ebola in town, don’t touch your friend! No kissing! No eating something! It’s dangerous.

(A bunch of boys are walking past the neighbourhood and they’re singing ‘Ebola in town’)

Donda: Isn’t this the latest chartbuster sung by Shadow Morgan that has gone viral with the youth? I wonder why people dance on the tunes of the beast. Seems the beast is playing with our minds and everyone is going blind and crazy. Young boys and girls still eat Bushmeat in their homes and dance all night on the tunes of Ebola in town.

Shadow Morgan is earning a killing out of it. There’s a new brand of cola called the Ebola Cola, the haemorrhage that refreshes. A new Chinese movie called Ebola Syndrome has released. It’s poster says “it wasn’t murder, it was war!” Infested dead bodies are being buried in separate burial grounds but it seems many of us don’t care. It seems as a dark comedy.

(Donda looks at his face in a mirror hung upon the brown muddy wall of a hut nearby) My face is weather beaten, oily and bloated. My hair is falling, I ought ‘a drink less.

In the mirror I see, far behind me Edward has stood up and is chasing and pelting stones on an ongoing white van.

Edward (sprinting):“Get out you baboons or I’ll eat you”

Donda: Ey Edward!

Edward: Donda, what is it my man?

Donda: You’ve taken my shoes, you mule?

Edward: No, my man

Donda: Still, walk me over to my hut

Edward: Right away Donda

…and we walk (Edward humming Ebola in town…)