Saturday, 9 August 2025
CHETTINAD MUTTON UPPU CURRY
Saturday, 12 July 2025
The KEEZHADI Dilemma
The KEEZHADI Dilemma
The reason buzz in the Indian archaeology
and political circle was the discovery of an early civilization predating/contemporary to the Indus
Valley Civilization. The excavations at Keezhadi (13 km from the city of Madurai), part of the emerging Vaigai
Valley Civilization (VVC) in Tamil Nadu, have sparked a foundational shift in
how we understand the origins and development of Indian civilization. Dating
from as early as 6th century BCE, with some evidence potentially indicating
earlier cultural continuity, Keezhadi appears to reflect an urbanized, literate
society with a high degree of socio-economic complexity. This timeline places
the VVC not only contemporaneous with the later phases of the Indus Valley
Civilization (IVC) but raises the possibility of an even earlier or parallel
development trajectory in the Indian subcontinent's south.
This revelation challenges the
long-standing narrative that civilizational impulses originated in the
northwest (IVC), migrated to the Gangetic plains, and eventually disseminated
to peninsular India. That linear diffusion model which rooted in colonial
historiography has deeply influenced academic discourse, school curricula, and
popular imagination in India. Keezhadi disrupts this by suggesting that South
India may have developed urban, literate settlements independently, potentially
even predating the so-called Vedic or Aryan movements into the subcontinent.
The Aryan Invasion Theory (AIT),
popularized by 19th-century philologists like Max Müller, held that
Indo-European-speaking "Aryans" invaded and supplanted the existing
Dravidian culture in India. This narrative, while originally shaped by colonial
race theory, became institutionalized in Indian academic and political thought,
especially post-independence. However, modern genome research and
archaeological analysis have largely debunked this theory.
Genetic studies, including the
landmark 2019 paper by Narasimhan et al. published in Science, indicate
multiple waves of migrations into South Asia, but no evidence of a large-scale,
violent invasion. (“The formation of human populations in South and Central
Asia,” was published in the journal Science, specifically in Science 365 (issue 6457): eaat7487, with the
publication date being September 5, 2019). Instead, the data suggest gradual
admixture over centuries, with a strong genetic continuity in southern
populations.
Archaeologists such as B.B. Lal
and more recently Michel Danino and Tony Joseph have highlighted the lack of
material evidence, as no destruction layers nor abrupt cultural disruptions are
evident to support the traditional invasion narrative. This leaves us with a
more nuanced understanding that Indo-European speakers may have migrated into
the subcontinent, but they did not bring civilization to a blank slate. Where cultures
like the Sangam-era settlements, as evidenced by Keezhadi, were already
flourishing then.
Historically, the British utilized the AIT to justify colonial domination, by portraying themselves as "later Aryans" bringing order to a fragmented native population. Post-independence, dominant political narratives, largely shaped by the northern elite, continued to favor Gangetic-centric histories, emphasizing Vedic traditions and Sanskritic heritage as civilizational benchmarks.
Against this backdrop, the
implications of Keezhadi were understandably contentious. Reports emerged that
the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), under central oversight, allegedly
pressured field officers to modify or delay findings that could challenge the
existing paradigm. The officer who initially led the excavation, K. Amarnath
Ramakrishna, was transferred, sparking criticism from academic and civil
society circles.
Sensing both cultural
significance and political opportunity, the Tamil Nadu government, led by the
DMK, stepped in to continue the excavations through the State Department of
Archaeology, rebranding the site as emblematic of Tamil antiquity and Dravidian
heritage. While critics argue that this move was politically motivated, to
bolster regional identity and claim historical primacy, it nonetheless ensured
the continuity of a major excavation that could reshape Indian historiography.
Regardless of political
motivations, the discoveries at Keezhadi, and in the broader Vaigai Valley
region, are forcing a re-evaluation of long-standing assumptions that urbanization
and literacy in South India appear to have developed independently of Aryan or
Vedic influence. Tamil-Brahmi script found at Keezhadi shows evidence of early
literacy in Tamil, aligning with classical Sangam literature references, which
themselves suggest a rich cultural and political history.
The sheer sophistication of the
artifacts, such as brick structures, industrial-scale pottery, and evidence of
trade, mirrors features found in mature Harappan sites, suggesting South India
was not peripheral but central to India’s civilizational arc.
Keezhadi does more than just
elevate Tamil Nadu’s historical status, it opens the door to a pluralistic,
multi-origin view of Indian civilization, one that moves beyond the binaries of
Aryan vs Dravidian or North vs South. This shift is essential not only for
academic accuracy but for national integrity, allowing every region to see
itself not as a recipient of history, but as a contributor to it.
To fully embrace the implications
of Keezhadi, India must decentralize historical narratives, support independent
and transparent archaeological research, and allow evidence, not ideology, to
shape its understanding of the past.
ravivarmmankkanniappan@155912072025 2.7278° N, 101.9454° E
Friday, 4 April 2025
TRUMPONOMICS
While dramatic in tone, this sentiment
resonates with a significant portion of the American public. However, this
narrative of victimhood is, at best, only half the truth. The forces that have
shaped America’s current predicament—economically, politically, and
socially—have largely been born from within its own institutions. The
Freemasons, the CIA, and sprawling American corporations, independently and
sometimes in concert, have wielded an arsenal of instruments—economic pressure,
covert operations, political interference, and outright military
interventions—to construct and maintain global supremacy. This architecture of
dominance, built on fragile moral and economic foundations, is now unravelling.
What Trump laments is, in many ways, the blowback from decades of unchecked
ambition.
Historically, American foreign and economic
policy has often prioritized corporate interests and geopolitical leverage over
ethical considerations. The CIA’s role in the 1953 Iranian coup (Operation
Ajax), orchestrated in part to protect the interests of British Petroleum, is
one such example. So too is the infamous United Fruit-backed coup in Guatemala
in 1954, aimed at safeguarding American business interests under the guise of
anti-communism. These interventions were not anomalies—they were features of a
system in which American corporations and agencies played god in foreign lands,
reshaping sovereign nations in pursuit of resource control and market access.
Fast forward to the modern era, and this
imperialistic model has come full circle. The very forces that once extended
America’s reach are now implicated in its decline. Deindustrialization, the
offshoring of jobs, and the rise of the financialized economy were not
orchestrated by foreign powers, but by domestic elites and institutions seeking
short-term profit over long-term stability. The very corporations that once
profited from empire-building now exploit global labour arbitrage, hollowing
out the American middle class in the process.
In this context, Donald Trump emerges not
merely as a populist, but as a gunslinger—an erratic, self-styled saviour
trying to patch a sinking ship with brute rhetoric and protectionist tools. His
approach to global affairs can best be described through the lens of "brinkmanship"—a
negotiation tactic that involves pushing a situation to the edge of crisis to
compel the other side to concede. Trump wielded this aggressively during his
trade wars with China, in his strong-arm renegotiation of NAFTA (culminating in
the USMCA), and in his loud criticisms of NATO members and the European Union.
The objective was simple: make the other party believe they had more to lose by
not making a deal.
This is the essence of what many observers
have dubbed the “Trump Doctrine”—not a formal geopolitical theory, but a
recognizable pattern of behaviour marked by disruption, unpredictability, and a
hyper-transactional worldview. The Doctrine rejects multilateralism in favour
of bilateral arm-wrestling. It prizes short-term wins over long-term
relationships. It uses pressure, not persuasion, and thrives on keeping allies
and adversaries alike uncertain about what comes next. In essence, Trump
brought the drama and brinkmanship of The Apprentice to the world
stage—this time, the boardroom was global, and the stakes far greater.
America today is ensnared in its own
fragmented narratives. The unity that once held under the myth of
exceptionalism is breaking down. Competing ideologies, alternative facts, and
polarized media have created an epistemological chaos. Trump’s brash diagnosis
of decline—though simplistic—speaks to the disorientation many Americans feel.
He offers no nuanced policy blueprint, but a kind of political catharsis. He
channels rage, nostalgia, and distrust into action, regardless of whether the
solutions are viable in the long term.
Can he pull off his histrionic crusade? That
remains to be seen. Economics, after all, is not a hard science. It is
interpretive, contingent, and often shaped more by perception and power than by
theory. Throughout history, many policies dismissed by the academic consensus
have found unexpected success—or at least, political efficacy. Franklin D.
Roosevelt’s New Deal was derided by orthodox economists of the time. More
recently, Modern Monetary Theory (MMT), once ridiculed, is now entering
mainstream fiscal debates.
If economists themselves can’t agree on
foundational issues—from inflation drivers to fiscal multipliers—then why
should Trump's actions be judged solely by traditional metrics? He may not be a
scholar or a statesman, but he has demonstrated an uncanny ability to tap into
the collective psyche. And that, in the realm of politics, can be more potent
than technical correctness.
Ultimately, the Trump phenomenon is less about
the man than the moment—a nation reckoning with its own contradictions, seeking
clarity in chaos, and flirting with the idea that perhaps, just perhaps, the
loudest man in the room might be the one holding the mirror.
ravivarmmankkanniappan@1757040420253.0567° N, 101.5851° E
Sunday, 2 March 2025
The End Of FEIGNED DIPLOMACY
I was watching the diatribe in Washington recently when both Trump and Vance went on a diatribe against Zelensky. It almost sounded like an Indian talk show where they invite a guest, together with a few others who have an opposing view of the main guest, and everyone will target the main guest with barrage of offensive spews. With the thumping of noise, eventually the poor guest will give up arguing and end up looking like an incompetent fool.
What particularly caught my
attention are articles written by Pro Democrats describing how Trump had nailed
the end of global political diplomacy via his uncouth behaviour against his
guest, Zelenskyy at the White House.
But looking deeper into this
entire episode I find it reeks western hypocrisy since the “Great Game”. The
Great Game was an era from the early 19th century where both the British
and Russian empires were turmoiled in strategic rivalry to exert influence in
Central Asia. This parasitic hypocrisy festered exponentially, from colonial expansion
under the guise of civilising missions, to contemporary interventions, camouflaged
as “humanitarian aids”.
This led me to relook at an old
frustration with the modern systems of political diplomacy, particularly within
Western framework.
Western polity
today have come to believe that they own and are the guardian of democracy and hence
they have peddled that Political diplomacy and political correctness to be the pillars
of modern democratic discourse. The purpose of it all is to maintain civility,
avoid unnecessary conflicts, and promote dialogue among nations, communities,
and individuals. But history has taught us bitter lessons, where these very
mechanisms had and can prolong conflicts and exacerbate further problems.
Political
diplomacy often involves negotiation, compromise, and avoidance of
confrontational language. While this can be effective in certain circumstances,
it sometimes delays necessary actions. By focusing on tact, subtlety, and
consensus, difficult issues may be deferred or watered down, never fully
addressed. This is especially true in cases of deep-rooted systemic injustice,
where addressing the "elephant in the room" requires hard choices and
uncomfortable truths.
Case in
point, the Israel-Palestine conflict. It when through decades of negotiations,
peace accords, and UN resolutions, but todate negotiating parties have avoided
direct confrontation with core issues, such occupation, settlements, and state
of displaced populations. So, what we see is, in the name of political tact and
compromise, the powers that be have skirted urgent action, prolonging suffering
and instability instead of addressing systemic injustices with decisive,
uncomfortable solutions.
In the form of political
correctness, which was originally the outcome of cultural sensitivity and
awareness, it prevents political leadership from speaking bluntly about
uncomfortable topics, even when those topics demand urgent attention. For
example, the unwillingness to confront inequalities or histories of
exploitation head-on, out of fear of offending certain groups, may
inadvertently perpetuate the very issues one aims to resolve.
This was evident in South
Africa’s post-apartheid transition. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission
(TRC) prioritized national unity over full accountability, granting amnesty to
many perpetrators of apartheid-era crimes. On one hand this fostered peace, but
on the other it failed to address the more pressing economic inequalities which
stemmed from historical exploitation. Hence the failure to confront this systemic
injustice ended up with wider socio-economic disparity.
Therefore, in times of a transparent
digital connect today, the notion of discreet hidden agenda is no longer viable
nor judicious. The Cambridge Analytica scandal is one good example of how
digital transparency exposes covert political agendas. In 2018, it was revealed
that Cambridge Analytica had harvested data from millions of Facebook users
without consent, using it to influence elections, including the 2016 U.S.
presidential race and the Brexit referendum. This incident highlighted the
erosion of privacy and the need for greater oversight in digital political
strategies, and it goes to show nothing goes without scrutiny of the masses.
It is about time political statesmanship
approaches both global or domestic issues, in a direct, confrontational
approach and break the cycle of evasive diplomacy.
This recalls the philosophy of
pragmatism, propounded by the likes of William James and John Dewy, where they
believe that solutions must be judged by its practical consequences rather than
adherence to abstract principles, case in point political diplomacy and political
correctness. Therefore, a pragmatic approach would cease diplomatic courtesy over
actually solving the problem at hand.
We have seen in history; bold
actions had been necessary evil to halt further sufferings. In the case of slavery
in the American history, the Civil War, which was considered a direct and
violent confrontation that, while tragic, was a necessary response to the
inability of diplomacy to address the problem. At the end of World War II,
negotiations failed under the Potsdam Declaration for Japan to surrender
unconditionally. All diplomacy failed even with USSR onboard the process. The failed
diplomacy to end the Pacific war led the US to go for an atomic strike on
Hiroshima and Nagasaki. By no means to justify the act, it appears that it was
the only pragmatic way to jolt the Japanese to concede surrender. Hence the
phrase “to catch the bull by its horn” though appears hardnosed would be an
unflinching stance to achieve meaningful solution in global politics.
The "Western political
gentlemanship" which is bounded by a system that has been built upon a façade
of civility, often comes with the risk of maintaining the status quo,
particularly when power structures benefit from the existing situation. The irony
is this construct disguises the truth by using diplomacy as a shield to avoid
confronting uncomfortable baggage that the Western powers carry.
Philosophically, Nietzsche argues
that moral codes and ethical structures can be a form of weakness, hiding the
true will to power. In diplomacy, moralizing or portraying it as the universal
solution, can serve as a cloak to evade addressing the deep-seated power
imbalances that shape international relations or even domestic policies. Interestingly
Western political elites had for time immemorial have engaged in these
practices not out of genuine concern for fairness, but because these systems
serve their interests and uphold a facade of legitimacy.
So, did Trump expose the elephant
in the room? Far too long the leftist media had portrayed Zelensky as the victim
but never once attempted to explore his role in the entire conflict. Putin (not
an angel himself), was a convenient entity to put the entire blame on, and the
media pandered to this gallery.
Hence it will be apt to give a
philosophical twist to expound the limits of politeness and diplomacy. Jean-Paul
Sartre, the existentialist, postulates that individuals and societies often
choose to ignore uncomfortable truths because facing them would demand
responsibility and action. Hence Sartre says, this avoidance is a form of bad
faith or simply put an act of self-deception that shields stakeholders from the
consequences of their own freedom and the responsibility to change things.
Philosophically, acknowledging
the elephant means being willing to confront not just the obvious political
issues at hand but also the willingness to accept accountability for the
historical, structural, and systemic factors that have allowed the conflicting
issues to exist and persist.
Interestingly, this
confrontational style embraces the discomfort of acknowledging that, at times,
the structures of diplomacy and political correctness serve the interests of
the powerful rather than those they purport to protect.
Candor is essential in seeking an
amicable solution to any conflict, particularly in global politics. The need
for honest and openness in confronting political issues, must be a given,
particularly when the current systems of diplomacy and political correctness
seem to either sidestep or perpetuate these problems. While diplomacy and
political correctness have their merits in maintaining peace and civility,
there are times when these mechanisms fail to address the core issues at hand,
and direct action is necessary. This incident underscores a willingness to
confront uncomfortable truths about power dynamics, moving beyond polite
conventions to address systemic issues directly.
The Oval Office meeting between Trump,
Zelenskyy, and JD Vance exemplifies this confrontational approach that
challenges traditional diplomatic norms.
Philosophically, this aligns with
pragmatic, existential, and Nietzschean ideas that urge individuals and
societies to stop hiding behind polite conventions and face the hard truths
that can lead to real change. This, however, comes with a cost, the willingness
to accept discomfort and potentially contentious action.
“Never underestimate the sly of a
person, Trump is not a clown, nor Zelenskyy an angel.”
Cheers.
ravivarmmankkanniappan@1241030320253.0571° N, 101.5911° E
Saturday, 15 February 2025
The Maha Kumbh Mela and Quantum Mechanics
In
quantum mechanics, time and space are not fixed constructs but infinite, fluid
dimensions where reality exists in superposition. The linear perception of
time, a mere human construct, dissolves in the quantum realm, where past,
present, and future coexist. Particles behave probabilistically, moving with
apparent free will, neither bound by causality nor confined to a singular path.
The universe, in this view, is a boundless quantum field, constantly shifting,
where existence is not a sequence but an interconnected whole. Without a
definitive beginning or end, what we call "reality" is but a fleeting
wave in an infinite ocean of possibilities. So a simple observation of nature
is all about nothing. Since reality is an infinite quantum field, any
observation is merely a transient interaction within an ever-shifting wave.
What we perceive as nature is an illusion—nothing but fleeting probabilities.
Quantum physics suggests
that reality is a superposition of possibilities, with particles existing in
multiple states until observed. This aligns with Vedanta’s idea that the
perceived world is Maya—an illusion created by the mind.
According to Vedanta, our perception of reality is not absolute but conditioned
by our consciousness. Ramana Maharshi emphasized self-inquiry (Atma
Vichara), urging seekers to question the very nature of their
existence, ultimately revealing that the self and the universe are one
indivisible whole.
In
quantum mechanics, the observer effect highlights how observation collapses a
wavefunction into a definite state. Similarly, Vedanta teaches that the mind,
through identification and perception, constructs the illusion of separation.
If the observer withdraws their identification with form and time, what remains
is pure consciousness—akin to the un-collapsed quantum field of infinite
potential.
The notion that time is a human construct resonates
deeply with Advaita Vedanta, which posits that past, present, and future are
mere projections of the mind. In the ultimate state, beyond duality, existence
is timeless and boundless, just as quantum physics suggests a reality beyond
deterministic cause and effect. Thus, both quantum mechanics and Vedanta
converge on the idea that reality is an ever-shifting, interconnected field of
potential, where what we call "nature" is but a fleeting manifestation
of the infinite. The key, according to Vedanta, is to transcend illusion and
recognize the eternal self—the substratum of all existence.
Hence to understand
consciousness, a spiritual seeker should practice Atma Vichara
(self-inquiry), asking, "Who am I?" Ramana Maharshi propounds
the notion of self-enquiry, which is the process to dissolve egoic illusions, to
reveal pure awareness. Meditation and mindfulness is known to help transcend
time-bound perception, aligning with the quantum field of infinite potential. Therefore,
detaching from transient phenomena, observing without attachment, and
surrendering to the present moment would lead to direct experiential knowledge.
True realization arises when the seeker recognizes that consciousness is not
personal but the infinite, formless essence of existence itself.
Sivapuranam,
a devotional hymn to Lord Shiva, deeply resonates with Vedanta philosophy and
even parallels quantum mechanics in its understanding of reality. The hymn
glorifies Shiva as the ultimate, formless reality (Brahman), beyond
duality, time, and space. This aligns with Advaita Vedanta, which teaches that
the world of separateness is an illusion (Maya), and true knowledge
comes from realizing the non-dual, infinite self. By surrendering to Shiva,
devotees dissolve their ego, transcending the limitations of individuality and
merging with the absolute.
From a quantum
perspective, reality exists as a superposition of possibilities until observed,
similar to Vedanta’s idea that the material world is not independently real but
shaped by consciousness. The hymn’s devotion symbolizes a shift from identification
with transient forms to recognition of the infinite field of existence—just as
quantum physics describes the universe as an interconnected energy field rather
than fixed matter.
By meditating on Shiva,
the seeker quiets the mind, moving beyond perception-based illusions. This
echoes both Vedantic self-inquiry and the quantum notion that observation
shapes reality. Ultimately, Sivapuranam serves as a bridge, guiding one
from egoic limitation to the boundless, eternal awareness that underlies both
spiritual realization and quantum existence.
The Maha Kumbh Mela,
the world's largest spiritual gathering, resonates deeply with Ramana
Maharshi’s core teaching of Atma Vichara (self-inquiry), the question “Who
am I?”. Seekers from all walks of life gather at the sacred Triveni Sangam
in Prayagraj, symbolizing the dissolution of ego and the purification of the
self. The confluence of the holy Ganga, Yamuna, and Saraswati is the focal
point of this ritual, which holds special significance this time as it marks
the 12th year of the 12-cycle event, last occurring 144 years ago. The act of
bathing in the holy waters represents shedding illusion (Maya), much
like Ramana’s teaching, which urges seekers to go beyond the false
identification with body and mind.
Greeja, my nephew Yuhain
and I took our bath on Shatilla Ekadesi (an important day for Lord Vishnu) day
on the 25th January 2025. This day was also astrologically significant
in the sense that it was the day when 7 planets, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn,
Neptune, Uranus and Mercury (joining the alignment briefly), making it one of
the rarest celestial events. More importantly this alignment is believed to
amplify the energies of these planets, which in turn provides an aura for personal
transformation and growth. This cosmic intervention is supposed to facilitate the
alignment of one’s thoughts, action and goals. While taking our holy dip facing
the sun, each of us had our own introspection, and none of us spoke about it, quietly
embracing the energy.
At that moment, the
absoluteness of my existence seemed meaningless—stretching into eternity—though
it lasted only a few minutes. I closed my eyes, lost in contemplation.
What eventually brought
me back to my senses was the thought of Raviena and Banu, who were celebrating
their special day as well. In New Zealand, they had their Registration of
Marriage performed, and we had the privilege of witnessing the ceremony live via
video, just before we set out for the Holy Dip.
It was an incredibly
emotional moment for Greeja and me. Though we felt the sorrow of not being
physically present, we were comforted knowing that she was surrounded by
wonderful people to witness the occasion. Our emotions deepened even further
when we saw her wearing my late father's watch. It felt as though he was there
in spirit, watching over her, witnessing her momentous day.
At that instant, I
realized that the path of self-inquiry would not be an easy one. Detaching from
worldly bonds is no simple task when one is deeply rooted in attachments,
responsibilities, and the accountability that life inevitably brings. The
journey inward is profound, yet the ties of love, duty, and relationships
remain ever strong, making the pursuit of self-realization both challenging and
deeply meaningful.
To me the Kumbh Mela
was not just a ritual but an inward journey, where seekers renounce worldly
attachments, mirroring Ramana’s path of introspection. The vast congregation
reflects the interconnectedness of all beings, reinforcing Vedanta’s idea that
the self (Atman) is not separate but one with the absolute reality (Brahman).
Just as the seeker inquires “Who am I?” to dissolve ego, the Kumbh Mela
provides a space for self-reflection and ultimate realization.
For me the journey continues, searching for the beginning, to understand the end.
ravivarmmankkanniappan@2317160220253.0567° N, 101.5851° E
Friday, 20 December 2024
from BEARDO's kitchen : Katta Salted Fish Curry ...... a Sri Lankan version
Finally you can fire up the stove, and let the main ingredients to cook. You can put a lid on so that it cooks well.
Thursday, 19 December 2024
FEAR
I was inspired to write this piece after my recent encounter
with FEAR in Sri Lanka. A feeling that was long forgotten by me, caught up with
my existential self.
I was in a situation recently that should have put me in the
utmost fear. But for whatever reason, the fear did not engulf me, instead, my
entire focus was channeled towards getting out of that tight spot as best as my
roommate and I could. Even after out of danger, my friend and I together with
the rest were focused in making sure all of us got out safely.
Well, only after an hour out of harm’s way, my legs started
to wobble a little. I guess the adrenaline rush just then was weaning off.
Fear is a natural psychological reaction when one is caught
in a situation which they are not in control of. However, what is most
important is not so much the fear itself but how we handle this fear. I still
remember making a ruckus wanting to go back while watching the movie Gumnaam (a
Hindi movie), so my Pappa had to bring me back home, while my Amma and Aunty
continued watching the movie. Mind you this happened in 1966 when I was a mere
3year old, and I can still vividly remember it till today, such is the power of
fear.
But of course I have come past that a long time ago. But
retrospectively looking at life, I have come across some of the most defining
moments, and fear following me throughout.
However, what made the difference was the way I handled it to-date.
What is the worst that can happen to one, ultimately it is
death. If one can accept death and does
not fear the inevitable death, then there is nothing to fear, at all.
The Buddha in his teachings had emphasized the practice of
Maranasati or the mindfulness of death as a way to confront and accept
mortality. In the conversation between Yudishithira and Yaksha in the
Mahabharatha (the episode of Yaksha Prashna), one question posed was, “What is
the greatest wonder in the world?” Yudhishithira’s answer was, “Day after Day,
countless creatures go to the abode of Yama (death), yet those who remain
desire to live forever. This is the greatest wonder.”
According to psychologists, fear is basically an emotional
response triggered by a specific perceived threat. The brain’s amygdala and
hypothalamus kick in to survival mode where the body could respond in 3 ways: FIGHT, FLIGHT or FREEZE. At that point the
adrenaline and cortisol rush would determine how one manages the threat.
Interestingly the fear of the known seem to be easier to manage than the fear
of the unknown. I guess when one is dealing with a known threat, the hindsight
knowledge one has allows the person to better prepare, rationalize and cope
with the impending threat. Whereas when the fear culminates from a threat that
is unknown, it definitely creates uncertainty and a lack of control to the
person and eventually amplifying anxiety.
Greeja and I were once caught in the Trafalgar Square,
during a London Mob (it’s London, so anytime is a good time for a bovver), an
experience we will never forget. It was extremely overwhelming, people running
in all directions, and with both the perpetrators and enforcement personnel
engaging head on. In the midst of the chaos the most likely thing that can
happen is both of us may get separated, which we did for a good 5 minutes, when
someone just shoved his way between us which broke our clutched hands. I turned
around and within minutes Greeja was out of my sight. The fear of something
happening to her made me break out in a sweat, but thank God she was pushed to
a wall and I managed to reach her and we started walking the opposite direction
away from the mob. But for that moment the fear of losing her engulfed me,
though just minutes before we got separated we did agree, that in the event
we do get separated, we will not waste our time looking for each
other in the riot but will head straight to our hotel and meet up there.
Thus were some of the moments in my life where I faced some
of the worst fears. But it is nothing compared to many historical figures who
saw death staring straight into their eyes and yet they continued to strife to
pursue their course. Alexander Solzhenitsyn who faced brutality and certain
death whilst imprisoned in the Russian Gulag by the order of Stalin, continued
to write exposing Stalin’s totalitarianism. Or for that matter, nothing compares
to the sacrifice of Kuyili, the Commander in chief of the Udaiyal Womens Army to
Rani Velu Naatchiyaar in 1780. Where Kuyili, applied ghee to her body,
self-immolated and jumped into the British Ammunition depot in Sivagangga,
Tamil Nadu, which gave Rani Velu Natchiyaar the advantage to defeat the British
and the Nawab of Arcot. I dared not imagine what ran in the mind of Kuyili, at
that moment when she decided to leap into the arsenal ablaze.
These are moments where the “FEAR” of a bigger call diminishes the individuals “fear” of an imminent threat or even death.
I would end my thought with a quote by Ralph Waldo Emerson,
“The hero is no braver than an ordinary man, but he is brave five minutes
longer.”
Hence my only hope is, next time when I am in a tight spot
which threatens my existence, I would have the wisdom to exercise that FIVE
MINUTES.
Cheers.
ravivarmmankkanniappan@2014121920243.0567° N, 101.5851° E




.jpg)












.jpg)

