What really is Christmas?

This is a serious question. Everywhere, from all over the world, people are celebrating Christmas. Christians are celebrating, non-Christians are celebrating and even Christians, who deny that they are Christians, are celebrating Christmas. Of course the non-Christians are celebrating Christmas without even understanding what it is celebrated for. But why is a Christian who denies Christ is celebrating Christmas? Is it for fun-sake? Wonderful!

In Bangalore, in the colony where I live, my non-Christian colleagues and their families and children are celebrating Christmas today in the club. Christmas tree is decorated, presents are kept under the tree and distributed to the children by someone dressed as Santa and a few carol songs are sung and games are played and there is great rejoicing and wishing Merry Christmas to everyone present.

Is that Christmas? Do they even understand what Christmas stands for? None of them believe in Christ, that he came to save the world from sin or to give them eternal life or that it is the salvation plan of God the Father for human kind. They will get offended if such a message is given, saying that we are narrow minded people, restricting Christmas celebrations only to the Christians. They may even feel superior saying how Hinduism is so inclusive that they are enthusiastically celebrating Christmas, a festival of Christians, whereas Christians are exclusive and narrow-minded.

What is Christmas without Christ? Can there be a message of peace and hope and joy, if you have excluded Christ and are just observing a festival of exchanging presents or having a party and having a good time? That is definitely not Christmas.  

Christmas is the time when we remember that a child was given to us, so that we can be saved from our sins. The child was born of Virgin Mary, with the power of God and so when the child grew up to become a man, he was without sin. So he could offer himself as a sacrifice for the sins of the human beings. That was a great sacrifice because he was faultless and blameless and still people killed him out of spite.

Christmas is the time we thankfully remember that God came down to earth in human form, so that he can stand in the place of human beings, being tempted and put to suffering as a human being, yet remain without sin, giving us a model to live on. It is a time to remember what it cost God to come to earth, suffer and die so that we could live.

It is also a time to remember that fact that God raised Jesus three days after he died, when they crucified him. That gave human beings a hope that we will also be raised after we die and live with Christ forever. Death is not everything. It is not the end of everything. Nor do we have to fear death, being uncertain, as to what happens after death, where do we go? Jesus’ resurrection proved beyond doubt that he lives and we will also live in eternity.

God loved the world so much that he sent his only Son Jesus Christ, so that whoever believes in him will not perish but have eternal life. That is the whole point of Christmas, the birth of Jesus that we may have eternal life by believing in Jesus Christ. It is the way of reconciliation with God and to live eternally with God and Christ.

When we don’t believe a word of this great provision for the salvation of human kind, what is the point of simply celebrating just to have a good time and wishing each other Merry Christmas? It is so shallow and a mere lifeless chatter. We miss the significance of Christmas when we superficially celebrate it thus.

I hope one day people will recognize the significance of the birth, life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ and have real peace, enduring joy and happiness. I wish that day will come soon, may be at the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. Come early Lord. 

What made Nelson Mandela a Great Man?

Nelson Mandela, who is called the Father of the Nation in South Africa, is credited with dismembering the Apartheid regime in that country. He was loved not just by the South Africans of all colors, but equally by people all over the world.  What really endeared him to the world? This called for some investigation.

The first sign of greatness in the man, as discovered by me was, his humility. He had humble beginnings, a village boy, who played in the streams and meadows of the village Qunu, looking after sheep and calves in the fields, and running along with the other boys of the village. This simplicity and love of open spaces he carried with him till the very end. His disarming smile captivated every one. In his humility he was not ashamed of his humble home, but was proud, for he was the eldest son, by the third wife of the chief of Thembu tribe, an adviser to the local king. But, he went beyond these beginnings.

Second, he applied diligence and discipline to everything he ever attempted. As he trained for his long-distance running in his adolescent years, he enjoyed the discipline that went with it and the solitariness of the exercise. He felt that many had potentials but they failed to build their endowments, which is necessary even if one is mediocre.

In his age and country, it is amazing that Mandela continued his love for exercise till the very last. 

He loved a rigorous exercise and after a strenuous work-out he felt both mentally and physically lighter. He kept up his exercise regime even in the prisons, getting up early and going through on the spot running, jogging, sit-ups and push-ups. He believed that exercise was not only the key to physical health but also to peace of mind. It was an outlet for one’s frustrations and physical training became one of the inflexible disciplines of his life.

Third, Mandela had a tremendous sense of commitment, commitment to the cause, commitment to improve himself steadily throughout his life and commitment to his country. He learnt at every step and stage of his life.

The cause he was committed to was abolition of discriminatory practices of the white government towards the black people of South Africa. He was willing to sacrifice himself and everything that was dear to him for this cause of the oppressed. As he grew up, he understood the magnitude of the unjust laws under which the majority and indigenous population of the land was suffering. He started to help the oppressed black people legally as he started his own legal practice. It became his life goal.

Mandela was proactive. When he came in touch with the Communists in his country, who were also fighting the oppression of the white minority, he started to read Karl Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin and Mao to understand their philosophy. As he started to attend the political discussions of the African National Congress (ANC), a new world of ideas, political beliefs and debates opened up to him and he became thoroughly interested and enervated.

While preparing the “Freedom Charter” for his party, Mandela spent hours pouring over the American Declaration of Independence, French Declaration of Rights of Man, the Communist Manifesto, and so on. He was ever studying and kept his learning abreast. Abolition of racial discrimination and equal rights for all became his passion.

When he went on tour of the other African nations and later the Western world, Mandela used to lock himself in his hotel room and study the information about the country, its political history and leadership to understand more about the country he was visiting.

Self-improvement seemed to be the mantra of Mandela. Not only was he regular in his daily exercises, but he continued his studies in the prison too. He said it was a way to keep him from thinking negatively. He felt an obligation to improve and strengthen himself for the future, for whatever that may lay ahead. He continued to learn and be fresh in his mind and thinking.

Mandela’s commitment to the country was paramount. He understood that his commitment to liberate his people from Apartheid will involve personal sacrifice, but still he went ahead and plunged into politics of his day. It took him away from his family, his mother, wife and children; he was without a home life.

He had to be a fugitive and was underground for years to organize political activities; he was put in jail, forced to do rigorous manual labor, survived on scanty food, underwent innumerable slights and hurts; he went to jail in Robben Island when he was 46 years old in 1964 and came out only in 1990, when he was 71 years old. The best part of his life was spent in the jail. He said “Strong convictions are the secret of surviving deprivation.

He said, “During my lifetime I have dedicated myself to this struggle of the African people. I have fought against white domination and I have fought against black domination. I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony and with equal opportunity. It is an ideal which I hope to live for and to achieve. But if need be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die.”

Fourth, he was pragmatic. He had great admiration for Mahatma Gandhi and his non-violence movement, but when he realized that situations were different and that non-violence was not working in South Africa with the white minority rulers, he changed his tactics to violent armed resistance including guerrilla fight. He himself got trained in it and organized training for young recruits of ANC abroad.

Fifth, Mandela was optimistic. He was always hopeful. He never for a moment doubted that one day he will walk free and so also his people. His sacrifices will not go waste. He wanted to create a society where the black, colored, white and Indians will live in equality and freedom. He wanted to transcend the color barrier.

Sixth, the sacrifices Mandela made in his personal life were really great and at any time he selected his struggle for nation above his family obligations. His mother died when he was in Robben Island. He questioned himself whether he did the right thing by putting his country above his family. His first marriage failed because his wife wanted him to select between her and politics. He had to be in politics and she walked away. Their four children suffered the most.

His second marriage to Winnie ended two years after he returned from his 27 jail year term. Winnie herself was haunted by the police to harass and intimidate her. May be as a result, she had become notorious in her conduct and political aspirations. He had to seek divorce. Their two daughters suffered as they had to grow up without their father. Finally he married for the third time when he was 80 years old, longing for a simple family life, which had eluded him all through. 

  

He said, he was a life-loving man but was forced to live like a monk. He also said, “I am not a messiah, but an ordinary man who had become a leader because of extraordinary circumstances.”

Lastly, he was a balm applied to society during post-apartheid period that saved South Africa from civil war or massacres or division of the country. He assured the whites that there will be no witch-hunting. He wanted everyone to live in peace in the country. National reconciliation was his primary task.

Truth and Reconciliation Commission with Desmond Tutu was constituted in 1996 and sat for two years, where people just vented their feelings, both the oppressor and the oppressed. And forgiveness was sought and given. His view was the oppressor must be liberated just as surely as the oppressed. “A man who takes away another man’s freedom is a prisoner of hate,” and he must be liberated from that.

Mandela died on 5th December, 2013, when he was 95 years old. A great life ended and a great leader departed. He was a leader and a hero not just to his people but to the whole world.  What a great life! 

How do people cope up when they are oppressed?

When a tragedy like floods strikes how do people react to it?

Recently in the beginning of December, heavy rains descended on Chennai and the city went under the water. The deluge brought in its wake immense suffering and tragedies and loss. Cars and two-wheelers were either submerged or marooned. Water came up to the level of ceiling fans in the ground floor. Huts and makeshift houses of the poor built along the river banks were washed away, along with whatever belongings they had. Some elderly and some youngsters even died in the rising waters as they could not get out of their houses. So how do people react or cope up with such dire situations?

We learn from Chennai example that the milk of human kindness poured in abundant measure. Provisions and goods were rushed to the affected city from all over the country. Young volunteers at the risk of their lives tried to reach the unreachable areas to bring succor to the affected and isolated. Any and every one of worth was involved in relief operations. Hope in humanity shone like a star, bright amidst the gloom.

What happens when oppression is not due to the fury of nature, but from one’s own government? Where do people turn, when the fence that is supposed to safe guard them, becomes the predator? How do they cope with such situations? Where can they go? What can they do?

People in China faced such a dilemma, when Chairman Mao let loose the “Great Leap Forward” on them, with the ignoble goal of catching up with the West in 15 years. What was the hurry that the country should be developed within 15 years? Why not 30 years? Hasn’t China developed now? But it was a prestige issue.

Mao wanted to build a China, which would rule the world in technology and military power, all to be achieved within 15 years. May be he wanted to see such a China before his death. Was that the reason for urgency? The result of such megalomaniac ambitions was 45 million Chinese people died out of famine and other measures resulting from the Great Leap Forward, from 1958 to 1962, in just four years.

People became the pawns in the game. They were forced to work in steel factories, on dams and conservatories and on paddy and wheat fields; they were forced to work during the night also by the light of lanterns, torches and pressure lamps; private property was abolished; people had to eat in great communes and common kitchen; mud houses were demolished and used as manure for the land; pots and pans and agricultural implements were fed into country side furnaces to produce steel; people were forced to eat only vegetables as a sacrifice and a sparse diet was dished out to them; children were separated even while young, so that mothers could work. Family fell apart and life as they knew for centuries disappeared.

Nation was asked to pay a great price for development. Mao famously said, “Revolution is not a dinner party.”[1] People got a taste of it soon. Anyone who was foolish enough to oppose these moves or argue for his rights was punished by withholding the day’s food rations. That became the punishing rod in the hand so the party cadre. Soon flogging and beatings became regular in the communes; the higher ups when they came to know of it, encouraged them to use force to being people to their knees. Corruption became rampant. Targets to be achieved ruled the day.

The harvest was gathered and sent to Russia and other East European countries in exchange of technology and machinery. People who produced the grains were left to starve. All the same the party cadres, higher officials and Mao himself rolled in luxury. Provisions went to the party rulers first, then to the city folks and then for export. Villagers were left to fend themselves. Famine stared at their face, a man-made disaster.

How did people cope up with such a situation? Dikotter, who graphically describes the macabre situation in his book, says thus: “As famine spread, the very survival of an ordinary person came increasingly to depend on the ability to lie, charm, hide, steal, cheat, pilfer, forage, smuggle, manipulate or otherwise outwit the state.” And that is what they did.

When nothing could save them from hunger, they fell to eating the bark of the trees, cooking the leaves, even leather from old furniture, and mud. Still they died like fleas all over the country side. A few even dug the dead, cooked and ate their decaying flesh and organs.

Birth rate plummeted; women stopped menstruating due to heavy work and scanty food; children developed swollen bellies, indicator of undernourishment. Children, the sick and the elderly were considered as idlers and were abused. They were deprived of their dignity in life and in death. 

At the height of such tragedy, there was no human milk of kindness flowing for Chinese people. Mao advocated people to eat less and famously said, “When there is not much to eat people starve to death. It is better to let half of the people die so that the other half can eat their fill.” Is this the response from a responsible leader in the face of a national calamity? But we forget we are dealing with die-hard communists.

Not that the leaders suffered. Mao lived in opulence near the Forbidden City; his bedroom was the size of a ballroom. He enjoyed his daily swim in his private pool. He had the privilege of chefs and attendants all around at his beck and call. Chicken, egg, meat and vegetables came to his table from dedicated farms. Others down the line tried to copy his style of living, but the poor peasants and the factory workers went without even the basic requirements.

Was not Communism about proletariat and the workers? Then how come they are the ones who were ploughed in Mao’s communist China? Who is to ask him and face his wrath and end up dead or in the gulag? All checks on violence, namely religion, laws, family and community, were all broken and discarded. People became the means to achieve the ends laid down by their political masters. They died for their own good, they were told.

Opposition to Mao’s leadership became loud and the Great Leap Forward was discarded by 1962. A leader had to consolidate his power and position to survive. That is what Mao did. He launched the “Cultural Revolution” in 1966, which will exterminate all those who opposed him during the Great Leap.  When he died in 1976, with him also died the hysteria to develop China at the cost of its poor and rural people.

Hitler plunged the world into chaos for his ambition; Pol Pot copied Mao and wanted to develop Cambodia within 5 years; Stalin ruled Russia with iron fists. When such leaders come to power world witnesses untold suffering for the masses, whom they swear to serve. The watchman becomes the thief. The fence eats the crop.

Whether it is a man-made catastrophe like the famine that happened in China or a deluge due to nature’s fury as in recent floods of Chennai, people need a hope to cling to, a hope that will give meaning to their lives. A human life is not a waste; it has a purpose, a meaning and a dignity that extends even beyond the grave. In Chennai’s floods faith in humanity was restored, but still were hiccups heard of local politicians trying to get political mileage out of it.

It is only Christ who can really give unshaken hope to humanity, by his own selfless sacrifice and suffering on the cross and his rising from the dead, which give a meaning to our own sufferings and a hope beyond the grave. A new life, not soiled by selfishness, ambitions, pride and arrogance of human beings, but tempered by love and care and forgiveness, is the greatest hope for humanity, extended by Christ. Let’s embrace that with both our hands.

---

[1] Frank Dikotter, “Mao’s Great Famine,” Bloomsbury Publishing, London: 2010

Live-in Partnership in India: What do we make out of it?

It all started with the announcement of my young friend, who was my junior colleague at one point of my Service, that she is the proud mother of a boy child. I was taken by surprise and asked her when did she get married, for I didn’t even know that. She cheerfully answered she is not married but is living with her partner.

Not only that I felt shell-shocked but also felt bad for that youngster that she should settle for such a relationship. She was such an energetic, lively and upcoming youngster, when I met her and had a lot of promise in her. She was smart and beautiful too. Why would she do a thing like this? I couldn’t accept that. Her mother had not been able to accept it, though her father has been a great support, she said; so also her partner’s mother. I promised to go and see her and the child and also meet her partner.

I made that memorable visit on last Wednesday. The child of one and half months is pretty and is sure will grow into a handsome young lad in due course. Aunty, the partner’s mother was there lovingly taking care of her grandchild. My young friend was bubbly and happy and welcomed me into her hearth and heart. Her partner was at work. It all went on lovely.

Then came a time when we were alone; a time to ask questions and clarify my doubts. Why did she do this? Now that they have a child together, why not marry and settle down? She made it quite clear that she is not willing to do that, because things are going great just like this only. Why spoil it all by marriage?

What is her objection to marriage? Expectations change, she said. I have heard about that line of argument earlier. Yes, especially men, they are no longer required to be on their toes to satisfy the woman with her whims and fancies, but once married, they become confident and complacent and negligent too. But she was vehement to say it applies to the woman too.

By way of explanations she said, for example, she does not wait for her husband to come home so they could have meal together. They eat whenever it is convenient to each of them. May be what she really means is she is free from the obligations of a marriage and is without any responsibilities of a wife. But to get that freedom at present is she willing to trade off a life-long commitment and companionship? She seems to do so.

Of course, all these living-in relationship started with the West. There they do that to see if the partners have compatibility by living together for a few years before getting married. Marriage is always in mind, but it is postponed to see if they can pull it off and also to stabilize financially before plunging into married life.

The famous example being Angelina Jodie and Brad Pitt, the mega movie stars of Hollywood. They lived together for almost 7 years, had children of their own and adopted children and got engaged in 2012. Only in 2014, August they got married. May be she really wanted to test and see if Brad will be faithful to her and her little brood of children, before tying the knot. And it took her almost nine years!  

May be my friend also will settle down once she is convinced of the loyalty and fidelity of her partner. But who knows?   

In India this trend of living together without marriage is seen only in the major metropolitan cities like Mumbai, Bangalore and may be New Delhi and Chennai too. In the rural areas and suburban areas it is unheard of. Society does not approve of it and it is a taboo even today. Even in a metro like Mumbai, getting a rental accommodation for live-in couples is hard to come by. Then they tell lies that they are married, just to get a flat or house on rent.

Is it the fear of divorce or separation that drives women to accept such a relationship? Once bitten twice shy, they say; possible. It is again people with more education, open mindedness and women who are financially independent, who enter into such arrangements. May be they think they can afford to take a chance and experiment with their lives in this manner.

On the flip side, such arrangements, lack commitment to see one through the tough and tumble of life. Children require stability and emotional security. Why only children, the woman herself requires emotional security of a marriage; so also the man.  This live-in arrangement can dissolve at any time with no pang or remorse. One can come to have a callous heart. Can love to be found, in a family not bound securely in marriage?

That marriages are breaking is no excuse to live-in experiments. What we need to do is to see how we can stabilize marriages, starting with the selection and then the adjustments and the effort needed to make the marriage work. It is a difficult and life-long process, but worth the effort for all concerned.

God created man and woman and the institution of marriage for them to find emotional security and companionship in each other and also to bring up the children in a stable and loving environment, with both the parents playing complementary roles in nurturing them.

According to Bible, living together without marriage is sin, tantamount to adultery. As someone commented in America the divorce rate may be high, but marriage rates are also equally high. Marriage has not lost its attraction or its utility.

One might get out of a difficult marriage for a good reason, but the next time on, either be careful in selection and marry wisely or stay alone. This staying together without marriage is definitely not the solution to problems of fidelity or fear of a marriage ending in divorce or wanting to be free and live for the present. The moral boundaries of life laid down by God cannot be broken without suffering the consequences of such a choice.

Will the young people of 21^st century listen to such voices?    

How many times you weigh yourself in a day?

Yes, seriously, how many times do you weigh yourself in a day? How many times do you get on to the weighing scale to check your weight? Well, if you ask me, not less than ten times a day! Wonder what is wrong with me? Don’t. I find it to be a healthy habit. Whoever said to those aspiring to lose weight, not to check weight often, in my opinion, is totally wrong. By checking your weight often you come to know the progress you are making in losing weight and also learn to correct your food habits, if the weight is not coming down as planned or if it is adamantly stagnant.

My day starts with climbing out of bed and after the visit to the toilet, climbing on to my digital weighing scale, which is kept just next to my bed. My day had started well if I have lost one kilogram (kg) from the weight I had recorded the previous night before going to sleep. One kg less means your bowel movements are good and you have eaten your good share of fiber and fruits and vegetables, cooked or raw.

The next checking is done immediately thereafter, on consuming a fistful of dry fruits, and a hot glass of water in the cold season or water at room temperature during warm and normal weather. I usually add 200 grams on this.

After my morning devotional readings and prayer, I go for my 45 minutes fast morning walk, up to the mini-forest near my home and on return the first thing I do is to check the weight. I just manage to lose 100-200 grams on this exercise. When weather permits, Bangalore being cold, I go for my 45 minutes swim and manage to shed at least 300 grams. So that shows you that exercises like swimming are more strenuous than walking. See, such constant checking help you know how much your body responds to the exercises you are on. In case the result is not much you can always change the exercise to something a little more strenuous.   

Well, next is the energy giving breakfast. I have a sumptuous breakfast with three idlies (rice cakes) taken with dal sambhar (lentil soup) and a mug of nice hot milk. It adds almost 700 grams to my weight. But it is good to have a healthy and good breakfast. Never skip it. You need the energy it gives to go on till after noon.

You might like to take a snack or/and fruit around 11 am to nourish your body with good nutrients and you might just add another 100 gram to your weight, not very much really.

Then comes lunch time.

Does it look as if I am only planning and eating food and not doing much in between? Ah, not true, not true at all. When I was in Service I was working quite hard and missed the midday snack or fruits, but always caught up with lunch. Now that I am retired, I do a lot of reading and writing and counseling and teaching and preaching, but I do have enough time to keep up my schedule.

After a good lunch of a cup of rice with dal (lentil soup), one cooked vegetable, a piece of fish, curds and salad, I add up to 500 grams. A sumptuous lunch is again a must to keep your energy levels up throughout the day until the evening.

Evenings, if I am at home I may take a healthy snack or a fruit and a cup of green tea and this adds just 200 grams. Thereafter I go for my evening walk, which you can call a stroll, for I do it leisurely with my friends, for around 45 minutes. This brings down the weight by another 100 grams or so.

A light supper in the night of just two thin chappaties (like tortillas but made of wheat flour), some vegetable and a piece of fish, one might add another 300 grams.

So you see, now you know how much you have eaten and how much you are expending after exercise and work. A healthy human being with normal working hours would require at least 2000 to 2400 grams of food intake. Of course it has to be healthy food and not junk or sugary or fried stuff. From morning we do lose 1500 or 1750 grams in our daily routines and exercises. Some extra energy is always welcome.

Ah, but you must weigh yourself before hitting the bed, so that you can know how much you have lost in the morning on waking up. You will also notice on days you have gorged on sweets and cakes and fried snacks, though your intake by way of grams is like the normal food intake, mornings the weight will stay and that is the extra weight that makes you gain more weight. So such checks helps you to find out what wrong food you are eating and to cut on that, in case you want to lose weight and want to be healthy.

The same principle applies to taking water also. On taking water you do add 100 grams or so, but on relieving yourself you will lose that. You need to take water as much as you can, as per your thirst requirements.

Well folks, so if someone tells you to check your weight on the scales once in a week or a month, know that it is not scientific. It is better to take your weight before and after each meal, including snacks, so that you will know how much really you are eating and where you are gaining more weight, so that you can cut on that.

If you can do this religiously for a week or a month, then you come to know the pattern of your food habits and how your body responds to it, and thereafter, may be you need not be that meticulous.

So go ahead and check on your weighting scales, even up to 12 times a day. You will lose nothing but gain a lot of information about your own body.

Happy experience with your weighing scale!

Is loneliness your problem?

In case loneliness is your problem, do not worry, for you are in good company. Plenty of 21^st century people are lonely at one time of their life or the other and sometimes forever! Yes, it feels for ever too.

One can be lonely in the midst of people also. You are in a crowded railway station or bus stop or even airport, but still you are just an unknown face in the midst of sea of faces or an insignificant speck in the crowd. People could end up lonely because of various circumstances. It could be divorce or death of the spouse or because one remained unmarried due one’s own choice or due to various reasons. 

Temporary loneliness could stare at people when they move to a new town or city or when students leave home to study abroad, or start school or college at a new place. But I am more concerned about permanent loneliness, which many people face.

The modern Western culture encourages people to be individualistic, self-dependent and self-sufficient. This increasingly makes people self-centered and selfish, creating barriers to meaningful relationships. People feel alienated.

Some people are lonely because they are made that way. They could be introvert, inward-looking people, with personality types like choleric or melancholic. They just can’t help it, for they are not the people-persons. They like to be left alone. It is better to find out your personality type, so that you are able to accept your nature and not feel guilty or depressed about it.  

The deep longing in the human heart to be with someone, to share with someone or even to talk to, is not satisfied when we are alone and we naturally long for such a relationship. After all God created Adam and Eve to keep each other company so that they are not alone in life. That is the ideal situation. 

“Man is by nature a social animal,” said Aristotle the ancient philosopher. We were created for relationship. When we do not get it we feel deprived and lonely and purposeless in life. Sometimes life becomes unbearable that people go and commit suicide.

In practical terms what can be done to combat such loneliness? First thing to do is to face such loneliness squarely in its face. One needs to accept the fact that one is lonely. May be it was due to a person’s decision, to go in for a divorce, or not get married after that, and to remain a bachelor or a single person. Whether it is due to our own decision or due to circumstances forcing such a status on us, we need to accept the fact that one is lonely and face it boldly.

Important thing is not to feel self-pity or ruminate as why this has happened to you or feel inferior to anyone. Remember Mr. Beans? He is always alone and he seems to enjoy it! He never feels sorry for himself, but of course he is out right selfish, taking care of his comforts and needs only. Still, I would say that he is a good model, not to emulate, but to keep at the back of your mind, because it is all in the mind after all.

Once you accept the reality that you are going to be alone, or the fact that you are alone, by choice or by force of circumstances, the next step is to see what you can do about it. The first rule here is to ‘keep busy.’ Take interest in lot of activities – brush up your hobbies, if you did not have any, develop some.

I have made it a point to keep myself actively involved at least in five different activities at any time in my life. Presently it is painting, swimming, reading, writing and bird-watching. Earlier it was some other similar five interests. That can keep you occupied so much that you wonder 24 hours of a day are not sufficient to do all that you want to do in your life. 

Advantages of keeping yourself busy are many. You can develop yourself; improve your qualifications, major in some subjects dear to your heart; you can end up being an all rounder, developing intellectual, mental, spiritual, physical and volitional aspects of your life, so that you would become an integrated personality. You end up as an ‘achiever’ achieving many things which the married or otherwise engaged peers of yours are not able to achieve.

The second rule is to ‘look beyond you.’ By this I mean, instead of thinking about yourself all the time, start thinking of other people who may be in need. The world around us is hurting in many ways. One more pair of hands to help will always be welcome. Engage in activities that help suffering people in any way to put a smile on their face, which will uplift your own spirits and make you feel useful. That will give you a purpose in life, something noble to do.

Third rule is to ‘cherish relationships.’ It could be any relationship, with a close friend, or your children or your siblings or nephews and nieces or aunts and uncles and so on. It could be a women’s group or men’s group with similar interests. We are made for relationship and we need each other. The bigger net work you have the better, for when you stumble, you will be caught safely in the web of relationships you have built around and you will be able to break the fall.

Lastly, you need to have an anchor in your life. It was Blaise Pascal who famously said, “There is a God-shaped vacuum in the hearts of every person, and it can never be filled by any created thing. It can only be filled by God, made known through Jesus Christ.” Having faith in God and accepting our need for such an anchor will remove loneliness from our existence, give us the emotional security, which we vainly look for in human beings. It is He alone who can give us that security and stability. The inner strength one gets from such faith and belief in God is enormous. With that one can face the world without any problem, alone or otherwise.

St. Augustine of Hippo said “Thou hast made us for Thyself, O Lord, and our heart is restless until it finds its rest in Thee.” Only in God shall we find rest for our souls and the ‘peace that passeth understanding.” Once we establish relationship with Him through Christ, worldly life also becomes heavenly and we have supreme joy and happiness which no one or no circumstances can take away.

Psalmist says thus in Psalm 18:1, 2,

“I will love You, O Lord, my strength.

The Lord is my rock and my fortress and my deliverer;

My God, my strength, in whom I will trust;

My shield and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold.”

In a short revelation to Joshua, who after the death of Moses, was to lead Israel into the Promised Land, God encourages him thus in Joshua 1:9,

“Have I not commanded you? Be strong and of good courage; do not be afraid, nor be dismayed, for the Lord your God is with you wherever you go.”

That was a great encouragement to a young leader, who had just been given the responsibility of leading the people in war and settlement.

Jesus, before He was taken in to heaven said the following to His disciples, in Matthew 28:20,

“… and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”

What an assurance and what a comfort! That anchor gives you courage to face life whether you are alone or otherwise. No more loneliness, for in addition to emotional security, Christ gives you a purpose in your life, showing you and leading you to what He really wants you to do. Will of God for us at any time is better than what we plan on our own to do, as long as we submit to His Will and obey His commandments.

Jesus will never leave you nor forsake you. He will always be with you to the very end of your days. You will never feel lonely or isolated. He will be your friend for ever. 

 

Crime against Humanity: Why do they do it?

A poignant remark about the 13^th November killings by Muslim terrorists, in which 129 French civilian people lost their lives, was that it was “a savage act devoid of humanity.” It is rightly so. But what one wants to know is why do they do it? The obvious answer is in the name of religion. Is that really so? It is worth pondering.

It is often said that the killings sponsored in the name of religion are much more than the secular or non-religious killings in this world, especially keeping Christianity in mind. This accusation is one major reason why the Western people lost their faith in Christianity and Christ, since it was accused to have sponsored violent killings of innocent people.

This led me to analyze killings both by religious and non-religious wars or events, especially so, after visiting Cambodia and learning about the mass killings engineered there not by religious people, but by Communists, who do not believe in any religion.

Let’s first take the casualties of religious wars sponsored mainly by Christians.

                                                                                                                                          30 years war,   Holy Roman Empire   1618-1648     Protestants vs Catholics        3 m French war of religion, France            1562-1598              -do-                                   2m

Crusades, Europe                                   1095-1291     Christians vs Muslims            1m

Spanish Inquisition                                1478-1834   Christians vs Christians    350,000

Witch hunts                                            1400-1800            -do -                          100,000

The major wars sponsored by Christians over the last 4-6 centuries add up only to six and a half millions. Not that this could be justified, but it pales into insignificance when we consider other killings. So why blame it all on Christianity, and why be angry with Christ?

Turning to the secular wars, we have these following figures.

French Revolution, France, Europe     1789-1799           (Napoleon)                     3-4m

First World War,                                      1914-1918                                                    17m

Second World War                                  1939-1945                                                    56m

The secular, worldwide wars took much more lives than the Christian sponsored religious wars, totaling almost 76-77 millions. Then again someone might say Hitler, who started the Second World War, a German and a European, was a Christian. Nothing can be far from truth. Hitler was an atheist and did not believe that there is a God, much less follow one. Hitler was influenced directly by philosophers that Germany had produced like Nietzsche.

Nietzsche (1844 – 1900), to briefly narrate, argued against Christianity, which he thought had emasculated people, by its teachings, especially on forgiveness and obedience. He wanted people to strive hard to become supermen and defy their fate. He famously said ‘God is dead,’ and recommended the void left by God to be filled with philosophy and art, in short, culture. He encouraged people to own up their envy and not suppress it, but use it to become what we envied in the other person – realize our full potential. No wonder Hitler emerged from the same soil, albeit 100 years later, as a man who wanted to be a ‘superman,’ and unleashed terror on the whole world. 

Be that as it may, the twentieth century, mass killings by Communist comrades and their totalitarian regimes, steal the prize.

Stalin,          Russia           Great Purge,                       1936-1938     20-50 million dead 

Mao Zedong,  China       The Great Leap Forward, 1958-1961

                                           Cultural Revolution,          1966-1976      60-70 m 

Pol Pot, Khmer Rouge   Cambodia ,                            1975-1979      2.5 m

Analyzing the wholesale massacre of their own people, amounting to 105-122.5 million, by the Communists, the main reason seems to be, to be in power and exterminate anyone who could be a threat to his power and position in the regime. Stalin’s purges were mainly to remove any opposition to his leadership from within the party and the party cadres. It is after all power gone to their heads that made them heartless and ruthless. Of course they believed in no God, and so no one to give account to. They were free to run the show.  

Coming to Islam, it is a story of its own. From the death of Prophet Mohammed in 632 AD to the next 1400 years or so, Muslims killed anyone who opposed them and their religion and had killed about 270 million people, including Christians, Hindus, Buddhists and so on. Here again the main motive is to world-wide domination as a people and not submit to any other culture, all fought of course, in the name of religion, Islam. It is political ambition, masquerading as religion.

Comparisons apart, are there any meanings in such killings? Why do they do it? Is there any method to this madness?

Well, for one, power and unopposed power, reigned supreme in such mass killings. Such Communists showed a method in their madness. In their eagerness to bring in revolution they pushed people like cattle, from cities to rural areas, to work like machines. They were not human beings created in the image of God, as Christians believe, but were inanimate pawns in their game of their power.

They were ruthless, since there was no fear of God. Stalin said let half of the population die, at least the other half can live in better conditions. Pol Pot’s theory was, there were no loss if the people died and no gain if they remained alive. It was ruthless suppression of human nature and humanity. The raw claws of evil inside the fallen man came to the fore.

Systematically learning was discouraged. Schools were closed both by Mao and Pol Pot. They withdrew all the children from high schools and colleges and used them as instruments to kill their own teachers and then their parents. These teenagers were like clean slates on which these leaders could write what they wanted them to do. Not unlike the Islamic terrorist brain washing the youth of today.

Next, they eschew private property, exterminate rich peasants and traders, and even abolish money and trade from the country as Pol Pot did, to do away with any personal ambition that human beings might have. The crux is people are not treated as human beings but as worms, as non-living objects to satisfy and fulfill the dreams of the leaders.

They relentlessly seek to destroy the roots of a culture, the family, God and religion, and knowledge through teachers and schools. In so doing these leaders assume the role of god. When a fallen man elevates himself to the heights of a god, we know what happens, his evil nature comes out and the world suffers. That is what happened under a Hitler, a Stalin, a Mao or a Pol Pot. Bible points out that in the end of times, another such an evil person will raise himself to be god and bring havoc on earth.

Is there a remedy? What could be done to combat these base natures of these leaders?

There is just one answer to all the fallen nature of our leaders and the people, that is, Christ. Forget what Christianity did to its people, because when the State joins hands with religion, people suffer terrible suppression. That is what happened in Europe in the middle ages and the pre-modern era. But the answer is not in throwing the baby with the bathtub. Throw away the dirty water, but keep the baby. That baby is no ordinary baby; he is the Savior of the world, come to earth as a baby.

The world needs a Savior; on our own, we will not be able to bring Utopia to the world. With the fallen nature of human beings that is next to impossible. The only light at the end of the tunnel is Jesus Christ, the Savior of mankind, today and forever. The earlier we realize this and seek His face, it is better for us and for the world.

Those who have thrown away Christ and his Christianity need to think; have they done the right thing? Or have they just given place to all other phony religions in the place of Christianity, which go by the names Atheism, Scientology, New Age Spirituality, even Hinduism, Buddhism and Islam. Isn’t that what has happened to the Western civilization? They have rejected Christianity and now are flooded with all other religions, vying with one another, to capture and occupy the place vacated by Christianity. We need to think.     

Killers let loose on Cambodia

The Post-Angkorian Cambodia was languishing in its traditions without the tradition-setters, the Hindu kings. The capital was shifted from the rice-growing hinterlands of North West Cambodia to the trade-oriented river banks of Phenom Penh. There were increasing incursions from Thailand and Vietnamese and the self-sufficiency and the strength of Angkor was gone. Priestly class and the royal family declined in power and importance, mainly because the kingship failed to protect the population from attacks from the neighbors. Such a scenario continued well into the 19^th century.

Cambodia was poor, depending on subsistence economy. Ethnic Khmer stuck to family-oriented rice farming, where yields were low and irrigation works were almost nothing after the demise of the Angkor kingdom. Marketing and foreign trades were in Chinese and Vietnamese hands; cattle trading and weaving were in the hands of Muslim minorities called Chan; tribal groups survived by collecting forest produce and selling these to the Chinese or Vietnamese traders. Infrastructure, like roads, was conspicuously absent. Most of the people lived in the rural areas.

Society itself was arranged in a hierarchical manner with the King and his entourage at the top, who distributed patronage and titles to the high ranking officials and the elite, who were able to muster strength and followers at times of need, from those under their patronage. Access to rice and manpower meant one was a king-maker, not unlike in India, where such a trend is visibly seen during elections, with caste leaders mustering votes, caste-wise, to whom they extend patronage in return.

But in the 19^th century, there was chaos; king almost ceased to exist. The two neighbors took over. Thailand introduced Theravada Buddhist way of administering things and the Vietnamese the Confucian traditions imported from China. Cambodia was the child to be looked after by the mother Vietnam and the father Thailand. Between the two influences Cambodia just managed to survive by being servile to each in turn.

At this time in history, when the French arrived, Cambodia had no maps, and its borders were marked only by the presence of people, who spoke Khmer language and where leaders received their official titles and seals of office from the King. All people were of ethnic Khmer, rural, occupied in rice cultivation and monastic life, as it was for centuries.

King Duang, restored to the throne in 1848 with the help of Thailand, under the influence of a Catholic priest sought the protection of France by sending gifts to French Emperor Napoleon III. The King perhaps wanted to escape the invasions of the neighboring Vietnam and Thailand, but it was like jumping from frying pan to the fire. Very soon in 1863, France established a protectorate in Cambodia, offering the King protection in exchange of timber concessions and mineral exploration rights. 

Was it the same game being replayed all over again? In the three Carnatic wars in the South India, the local kings and Nawabs sought the help of the French and the British to fight each other and the result was, the British walked away with the British Raj on a platter! African friends have a saying, ‘the Westerners gave us their Bible, but they took away our lands!” During the process of colonization by the West, it was the priests who always went first and then came the troops!

The French rule in Cambodia lasted just 78 years, from 1863 to 1941, much less than the British rule in India, which lasted for almost 200 years, from 1757 to 1947. Still the real and fundamental character of the people and society, whether Khmer or Indian, really did not change, for the hold of tradition was very strong in both the societies.

The French began in full earnest ‘to civilize’ the Cambodians and to make it a rice-making machine. A nation-wide rebellion broke out in 1885 and was put down. French learnt to go slow with their transformation of Cambodia, not unlike the British in India after the First Indian war of Independence of 1857.  King Norodom, great grandfather of the present King in Cambodia, had been weakened considerably and the French supplied him with free opium to keep him out of mischief. By 1897 French Resident took direct control of running the country.

In 1831, French naturalist Henri Mouhat discovered the ruins of Angkor in Siem Reap and started the work of restoration, the only major contribution of French to Cambodia. The first novel in Khmer was published in 1938 and the first Khmer News paper, Nagara Vatta (Angkor Wat) appeared in 1936. Schooling, roads, rail lines slowly made their appearance.

With World War II things changed drastically for Cambodia. King Norodom Sihanouk came to the throne in 1941. Japanese army occupied much of Indochina by 1945. With its surrender, French reoccupied the area. Vietnam War supported by the Soviet, was fought, first against the French and then against USA, who entered the fray to hold the spread of communism at bay during Cold War. The Cambodian Communist Party was started in 1951.

King Sihanouk abdicated and negotiated independence for Cambodia, which arrived in 1953. Elections were held in 1955 and the Prince Sihanouk emerged as the major political actor on the scene and held sway for the next 15 years, treating the country and the people as his personal fiefdom, a fertile ground for the communists to grow and increase in strength. His main contribution was to have kept Cambodia neutral, so that it didn’t get swept into Vietnam War. He was voted out of office by his own party in 1970.

When the Prince tried to purge the Leftists in the country in 1963, Saloth Sar (who will emerge later as Pol Pot), and Ieng Sary, members of Communist party fled the country to Vietnam and were under the protection of Vietnamese Communist troops. Vietnamese advised them to lie low till Vietnam was liberated. Saloth Sar went to China in 1965 and witnessed the Cultural Revolution there and next four years as he spent his days deep in the jungle, he drew up his plans and waited.

By 1970 riots broke out against the presence of Vietnamese communist troops in Phenom Penh. USA and South Vietnam invaded eastern Cambodia to fight the Vietnamese. In 1973, USA is said to have rained 100,000 tons of bombs on Cambodian country side to flush out Vietnamese. On cease fire agreement between USA and Vietnam, North Vietnamese troops withdrew in 1973.

Communist Party of Kampuchea (CPK), under the leadership of Saloth Sar, massacred civilian Vietnamese living in the capital and also the Cambodians who returned from Vietnam. On April 17^th 1975, Saloth Sar and his colleagues took on Phenom Penh, converging on it from on all sides. The sitting Prime Minister Lon Nol flew out of the country. The Prince was already in China.

The communists commenced their rule naming the country as Democratic Kampuchia (DK). Revolution and drastic transformation of Cambodia began almost immediately with lightening speed. The leaders of CPK who remained hidden in the first few years, believed that family life, individualism, and fondness for feudal institutions like monarchy and religion, stood in the way of progress of Cambodia and began mercilessly to demolish each of these institutions.

It began with the evacuation of the cities and the urban areas. All people, including those in the city hospitals were herded out and given orders to march to the rural areas. It was brutally executed; millions died in the process. The city people were commanded to work in the rural rice fields for long hours to enhance production. City people not used to such hard labor in the sun died like flies.

The idea was to produce excess rice, export it and earn hard currency to import machinery to industrialize the country. The original occupants of the villages, ‘the old people,’ were given preference over the ‘new people’ moved from the city, but everyone had to work hard and long hours in the fields. Many people were moved twice or even thrice to different regions. Many were put to work to construct reservoirs and channels for irrigation. The old people supported the revolution, without knowing what it really stood for.  

By 1976 surplus rice was produced, but it was all removed from the villages to export to China, who gave the Cambodian communists arms and ammunition. The villagers, who worked hard to produce the crop, were left without food. Weakened by hard labor and absence of nourishing food, people perished. CPK famously told them, ‘Keeping you is no profit; losing you is no loss.’ The leaders came out in open now and Saloth Sar assumed the office of the Prime Minister of the country as Comrade Pol Pot. The name could be a shortened form of Politique Potentielle, a French equivalent of Brother Number One, but really had no special meaning. The claws came out.

A constitution was drafted which abolished private property, organized religion, and family-oriented agriculture. By 1977 collectivization of all Cambodian property started and people were asked to eat in common community sheds, including the old residents of the villages. Next, the children were removed from the parents. Schools run by the monks were closed. Monks themselves were defrocked. The old residents resented these moves bitterly. Support to the revolution in the country side waned. Markets and currency were abolished.

By 1977, only rice gruel was served in the communes and taking mismanagement as the cause of malnutrition and death among the population, CPK let loose a severe purge of its own cadre. Confessions from these unfortunate cadres were got under torture and they were put to death. Search for enemies within the party intensified and people who had fought under Lon Nol, Vietnamese, those exposed to foreign countries, teachers, and professionals, all were eliminated.

Offences were mounted on the minorities who were living within Cambodia for generations and scores of Vietnamese, Chinese and Muslim Chans were massacred. CPK armies even crossed the border into Vietnam and massacred Cambodians who had fled there. They were called people with ‘Cambodian bodies and Vietnamese minds,’ dangerous for the success of revolution and had to be eliminated.

By December 1978 Vietnamese attacked Democratic Cambodia on several fronts. Pol Pot abandoned Phenom Penh and escaped in a jeep to Thailand. Cambodians welcomed Vietnamese invasion. And the horrible regime, Khmer Rouge, led by Pol Pot came to an end. Just within three years, eight months and 20 days, the communist regime in Cambodia managed to kill 2.5 million people. In 1979 and 1980 thousands of Cambodians crisscrossed the country searching for loved ones, dead or alive.

Gradually Buddhist schools were opened; markets and currency were reintroduced; Buddhism thrived again and family farming came back to life. Still there was no crop in 1979 and famine struck the country. Large scale foreign aid by way of grains flowed into the country. Mass graves were dug up and skeletons and skulls were unearthed, the places being named the ‘Killing Fields.’ The horrendous atrocities committed by Pol Pot and his soldiers gradually came to the knowledge of the world. Still CPK managed to find shelter in Thailand.

Vietnam withdrew from Cambodia after 10 long years in 1989. Under International scrutiny, The State of Cambodia was formed in 1991 and Prince Norodom Sihanouk, who was in exile, was brought back and instituted as the figure head of the country. In 1993 elections were held and a government was formed and the refugees returned.

Khmer Rouge was outlawed, but still they remained unrepentant, until the support of Thailand faded and fragmentation took place in the leadership. Still they fought against the new government using guerrilla campaign. Most of its cadres defected to the government. Implicated in the murder and liquidation of the Son Sen with 13 members of his family, who was his right hand man during the revolution, Pol Pot fled the country, but was captured and brought to trial by his own organization, Khmer Rouge. He was condemned to life imprisonment and died in deep jungle at the age of 73, on 15 April 1998.

Thus ended Pol Pot’s inglorious Khmer revolution, which tore the country apart, killing millions of innocent people. The country is limping back to normalcy. Still bogged down by poverty, corruption, and deep conservatism, Cambodia has a long way to go, to erase the wounds of the past and to become a healthy nation. What a suffering the people of Cambodia had to face! What a tragedy!