In my Website there will be several sections: Bible, Theology, History, Philosophy, Science, Psychology, Ethics, Poetry, Questions and Answers. It is still under construction…

   This has been my dream for years until today—to have a website where people can learn and grow. It is interdisciplinary website, without limiting itself only to one subject. It will help people to read and learn more and more. There will be questions that are awaiting answers. We do not claim to solve all problems or to answer all questions satisfactorily. But it is an effort for dialogue and harmony. Hence the name of archer for peace (from my Celtic name, IVO, which means ‘sagittarius’, ‘archer’)…

The Hebrew word SHALOM means peace, sum of all goods, well-being…

   This website is personal, it does not represent any organization. But the study of Bible will be historico-critical, conducted according to the guidelines of the Catholic Church.

   We hope that the readers will help us to construct the website, for it is still under construction. It will try to offer some substantial matter for study and reflection. There will be also some excerpts from authorities on the respective matter.

   We start it with pleasure… We shall avoid any controversies and unlimited discussions, which arise sometimes from different perspectives… We do not impose our views on others, nor do we change our views just by reading different authors.

   We live in a difficult, complex time, when we cannot understand the universe through one discipline only. We need the dialogue of several disciplines to know about the World, Man and God. We should remember the tradition that will help us to see the steps taken by human thought throughout the centuries. We cannot overlook the accumulated thought of centuries, the wisdom of the people, the growth of subjects.

   This effort should be the routine in our schools and colleges, in our universities and libraries. This effort will help people to grow…

   We do appreciate any constructive criticism. Your suggestions are most welcome.

BIBLE:

What is Bible?

     Bible is the “record of salvation history“, a narrative of the saving deeds of God for humankind in general and for Israel in particular. God is love (cf.1 Jn 4:8). He comes out of his silent, inner, Trinitarian life and sets out for a crea­tive adventure of love. His salvific plan is the outcome of his effusive love.  Out of his initiative of love God created MAN (that is, humankind), with whom there was communion. But due to the abuse and misuse of his freedom, Man refuses God’s love. In the process of saving Man from sin and its consequences, the historical God reveals himself as compassionate, merciful love. The God of the Bible is YAHWEH, the source of being and love. His ultimate aim was to give his only Son, the Word (cf. Jn 1:14; 3:16). God’s salvific design for humankind is recorded in the Bible. His Revelation is historical.  It is expressed in words and works/deeds (cf. DV 2). His self-communication is described in the Bible in terms of a covenant (Hb berith–Gk, diatheke), from which a permanent rela­tionship between Yahweh and humankind results.  He is God of covenant, of promises, who intervened in the history of human­kind. Covenant is a relational concept: God writes a love-letter to humankind.

     The Bible is a COVENANT, divided into OLD and NEW  (testa­ments/covenants, for the term diatheke means a disposition, covenant, or last will, cf. 2 Cor 3:14), instead of the more ordinary, syntheke). The former word does not require the death of the testator for the last will (or testament) to become effec­tive. It also insists upon the independent declaration of a person’s intention rather than upon a mutually agreed treaty. God’s supreme, generous and eternal love (hesed) lies behind the biblical appreciation of this word. The Old Testament is the record of the plots of covenants/relationships of Yahweh with his chosen people, ISRAEL, and a preparation to the NEW COVENANT, inaugurated by Jesus of Nazareth. This is the woop and warf of the   whole   Bible. When Jer 31:31-34 refers to a “new covenant/testament“, the new emphasizes the “interior spirit” (God’s Grace itself) with which the ancient covenant is  to  be followed. Jeremiah was seeking a renewal of the ideals of Dt 6:4-9, which asks that God be loved with all one’s heart, soul and might and that God’s words “be [inscribed] upon your heart“. Jesus too insisted upon this interior attitude of love in obeying the ancient law and traditions (Lk 10:26f). Old and new in this case connote the continuously new way of keeping the Word of God alive in one’s daily life.

   The term “Old Testament” was first used by Melito of Sardis (circa 180 CE.), and set more firmly in place by the popular theologians, Tertullian (160-230 CE.) and Origen (185-254 CE.). It is based upon passage, like 2 Cor 3:14 (“When they read the old covenant, that same veil remains unlifted, because only through Christ is it taken away“); and Heb 8:7 (“If that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion for a second“). Yet these passages do not abrogate the ancient scriptures, but rather affirm the light of Christ to appreciate their full meaning (cf. Mt 5:17). The theological  writers,  who fixed  the term OT in Christian tradition clearly argued for  the
value of the OT against such persons as Marcion, the first  major anti-Semitic writer in Christian tradition (circa 150 CE.).

   Etymologically, the word BIBLE is derived from the  seaport town  of  Byblos in Lebanon, named after the  papyrus  which  was imported  here  from  Egypt. It is the book of books, the anthology-library of the People of God, the BOOK par excellence. Originally, it was the Greek neuter plural, indicating the many books in the sacred collection. Because of the Christian usage, common by the fourth century, to bind biblical books in a single codex, the Gk word BIBLIA evolved into a Latin equivalent. It was taken into later Latin from Greek in the Middle Ages and taken to be a feminine singular noun, indicating the single book of the Bible (1 Macc 12:9). Theologically, the Bible is a collection of many books (or literary traditions), transmitted orally for many
centuries, edited and grouped into small units, dictated and written down especially in times of religious reform, to assure strength and clarity (2 Kgs 22:1-23:25; Jer 36:32). It is called also “scripture” (GRAPHE, cf.2 Tim 3:16; Jn 5:39; Mt  21:42; Rm 1:2). It is sacred, divine, inspired, inspiring.

     Jews today speak of The Holy Scriptures or of the TaNaK (acronym of Torah [Law]/Nebiim [Prophets] and  Kethubim  [Writ­ings], cf.the Prologue to Sirach, where the grandson, translating the work of “my  grandfather Jesus [ben Eleazar, ben Sirach--50:27]“, refers three times to the “law, the prophets and the  other  books of our ancestors“;  and Lk 24:44,  where  Jesus calls  attention to “‘the law of Moses and the prophets  and  the psalms“, the latter being the first book in the Writings).

   Dei Verbum After Forty Years

Biblical studies today are, ever increasingly, becoming complex and difficult, given the progress due to multifaceted research, historico-archaeological discoveries, as well as study of literary genres of the Ancient Eastern World. They are being enriched by new discoveries as well as by new exegetical methods, approaches and trends, both in the Old/First Testament and in the New/Second Testament. Studies of the historical Jesus are complicated by the discovery of new kind of historicity of Gospels as faith traditions (or documents of faith). At the same time, they are enriched by the discovery of reflections on the significance of Jesus rather than tape-recorded accounts or sheer history. God works in space and time; therefore, biblical studies should take into account the cultural background and the spatio-temporal circumstances. Theology develops with the progress of human sciences, such as psychology, sociology, anthropology. In this tremendous progress, we have to remember the “golden rule” for the teaching of the Church clearly enunciated by John XXIII, the Pope of “aggiornamento”, at the beginning of the Second Vatican Council. We have to distinguish between the truth and the formulations of faith, within the Scripture or within the Church. We should acknowledge the limitations of the formulations, but at the same time know for certain that there was a grasp of truth in those formulations. There was no distortion in the transmission of Revelation. The good Pope John XXIII opened the windows to new trends in the life of the Church. In his inaugural address, he clearly stated: “One thing is the substance; the other thing is the formulation of doctrine”. The Church has an insight into the Truth, since Jesus promised the Paraclete: “The holy Spirit whom the Father will send in my name will lead you to the whole truth” (cf.Jn 14:26). In this essay, I shall give a glance through the history of  biblical exegesis and the biblical approaches and methods, and then I shall pinpoint a few avenues to face the new challenges in the biblico-theological field.

     Vatican II is clear about the centrality of the role that Scripture consistently plays in the life of the Church:

 “The Church has always venerated the divine Scriptures, as she venerated the body of the Lord, in so far as she never ceases, particularly in the sacred liturgy, to partake of the bread of life and to offer it to the faithful from the one table of the Word of God and the Body of Christ…it follows that all…preaching…should be nourished and ruled by sacred Scripture. In the sacred books, the Father who is in heaven comes lovingly to meet his children, and talks with them” (DV n.21; see alson.24).

   Preaching should necessarily improve with the biblical wealth. Regarding the formation of the seminarians it states: “The ‘study of the sacred page’ should be the very soul of sacred theology. [1][7]The ministry of the Word, too—pastoral preaching, catechetics and all forms of Christian instruction, among which the liturgical homily should hold pride place—is healthily nourished and thrives in holiness through the Word of Scripture” (DV, n.24). In the priestly formation there is a need of a deep knowledge of critical methods. All these methods cannot overlook the work of the Spirit of God, the spiritual meaning of the text. Faith does not detract from the scientific study, on the contrary it enriches it and nourishes the ‘crucified love’ (cf.Gal 5:6). [2][8]

 THEOLOGY:

Evangelization and Inculturation

Introduction:

          Mission is at the centre of Systematic Theology today. Theology is critical reflection on the living praxis of the Christian community, which can be summed up as “mission”. Mission is the raison d’etre of the Church. Methods of proclamation of the Gospel have been always the object of study in Missiology. We have to admire the methods of  “missionizing” employed by Father Joseph Vaas. I shall give a glance through the missionary methods of Fr.Joseph Vaz, with a special attention to his study of languages. Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (now Benedict XVI) called Blessed Joseph Vaz ‘Asia’s great Colossus of Spirituality, Evangelization and Inculturation’. He is India’s ‘first and greatest native missionary’, declared Blessed by John Paul II on January 21, 1995, at Galle Face Green, Colombo.

1.Development and Inculturation:  The relationship between evangelization and development has been a perennial question, right from the begin­ning of Christianity, at the very first preaching of the Gospel. The Chris­tian community has to be open to the problems, longings and aspirations of the human race. Our longings cannot be differ­ent–nothing that is human can be alien to us. The joys, hopes, griefs and anxieties of men and women are also those of the followers of Jesus (GS 1). Proclamation of the Gospel has to be an answer to the deep questions of the people. It has, therefore, to enter into their culture, assume it and transform it.

 2.Language and Inculturation: The first task of the missionary is to learn the language of the people that are entrusted to him. It was an essential and powerful tool of evangelization. Several missionary stalwarts launched themselves into the missionary field with the study of language. Language entails the culture of the people. He has to learn their way of expressing, their reaction to the environment, their culture, their customs and mores. Without languages the missionary cannot be a leaven of the people of different cultures. We have several examples:

 a)Fr.Thomas Stephens:

The Christian missionaries in Goa taught their message in the people’s language. The printing Press was brought to Old Goa on September 6, 1556. The first Goan priest, Fr.Andrew Vaz, from Karamboli, wrote the first Konkani grammar in 1563. The first preaching in Konkani was in Banastarim. The first Konkani vocabulary was compiled in the year 1626 by the Jesuit Father Diogo de Ribeiro. Fr.Thomas Stephens  (1540-1691), the first Englishman in India, wrote Kristi Purana and Konkani Grammar.

 b)Mateo Ricci:

He was the pioneer of inculturation in China from 1589 till his death in 1610. He could gain the sympathy of the Emperor (Mikado) by studying the Chinese language and customs.

 c)Roberto De Nobili:

The Jesuits reached Madurai in 1606. Fr.Gonsalo Fernandes, during his tenure of 12 years in that great cultural city, in spite of his virtue and zeal, could not influence the local population. At that juncture, the Italian Jesuit, Roberto De Nobili, appeared on the scene, and tried to express the Gospel in terms of Hindu culture. He acquired command of Tamil and Sanskrit, and with the dress, diet and social customs of the Brahmins, started ascetical life of a recluse. He expressed Christian doctrine in terms of Upanishadic thought. He donned the white robes of a Sannyasi and influenced mostly high caste Brahmins. He composed several religious works, especially for children, when he shifted to Jaffna to recuperate his health (1645-1648).

He had to defend his methods against the accusations of his enemies, but the Archbishop Aleixo de Menezes upheld his defence, and Rome tolerated his methods for the time being. There were more than 4,400 converts at the time of De Nobili’s death in 1665.

 d)John de Britto:

The Portuguese Jesuit St.John de Brito followed the methods of Roberto de Nobili in Tamil Nadu. He studied well Tamil and donned the saffron robes of “Pandara Swami”.

 e)Joseph Beschi:

In spite of the martyrdom of St.John de Brito, the Jesuit Father Joseph Beschi worked in 1707 in Tamil Nadu and died in 1742. He left his contribution to every branch of Tamil literature: poetry, prose, grammar, lexicography, and particularly his epic poem, Thembavani, ‘the unfading garland’.

 f) St.Francis Xavier:

When Francis Xavier was alone among the Paravas and Mucavars, that is, the fisherfolk of South India, in 1545, he prepared a brief Tamil catechism with the help of persons who knew both Tamil and Portuguese, and left a copy of it in each village, so that each Kanakkapillai could read out from it for the instruction of the people.

 3.Fr.Joseph Vaz and Languages:

Fr.Joseph Vaz has been a model in his missionary methods, both in Canara and Sri Lanka. He has founded the Congregation of Oratory in Goa and the Asia’s first Catechetical Centre at Bolwatta church in the Kammala area.

When he arrived there, he had to learn both Sinhala and Tamil. He had already picked up a working level of Tamil during his secret movements in South India, especially as a coolie in the harbour of Tuticorin, Tamil Nadu. One of his early compositions in Konkani, “Meditations for the Way of the Cross”, was later translated into Tamil. He also compiled in Tamil a ‘Catechism of Christian Doctrine’ and a ‘Manual of Prayers and Litanies”. Also he composed a ‘Vocabulary of the Sinhalese Language’ in Portuguese. He learnt Sinhala during his imprisonment (1692-1694), in Kandy. Even in his old age, Fr.J.Vaz would dedicate some minutes towards the end of the day to the study of both Sinhala and Tamil, by candle-light.

When Fr.Jacome Gonsalves arrived in 1705, Fr.Joseph Vaz knew that he had flair for languages. Fr.Jacome had a working knowledge of Tamil, picked up during his travelling through South India to Jaffna. Therefore, Fr.Joseph Vaz directed him to live in Kandy mission and learn classical Sinhala. Fr.Jacome perfected his Sinhala by studying the Sinhala classics with the monks of the Malwatta Chapter. It is interesting that at that time, Fr.Joseph Vaz sent a priest for training in a Buddhist monastery, in such a fanatical set-up.

Fr.Jacome wrote both in Sinhala and Tamil, in prose and in verse, in the literary as well as in common language. He wrote books and popular passion plays, carols and hymns, that reveal his linguistic acumen and wide, deep knowledge of the vocabulary of the two languages. He is credited with the recto-tono composition of the Our Father. He produced a small library of Catholic literature suitable to the needs of the times. Today Fr.Jacome is considered one of the literary heroes of Sinhalese. All this was the fruit of the pastoral vision and concern of Fr.Joseph Vaz, a stalwart of inculturation.

HISTORY:

PERSECUTIONS

     Rome was very tolerant of the different religions and beliefs of her subjects. Romans in general, never imposed their gods on the conquered people. She protected the religion of the Jews since commerce in the empire was mainly in their hands. Since, in the official eyes, there was little distinction between Christianity and Judaism, the followers of Christ profited from their Jewish background. Though not particularly liked by the pagans,  the Christians kept aloof from pagan revelries and debausheries common at that time. The Christians managed to live in peace until the burning of Rome in 64 CE. when Nero was the emperor.

        Emperor Nero ruled the Roman world from 54 to 68 CE. For the first ten years of his reign, there was peace. Then in the summer of 64 CE. there was a fire in Rome and a large part of the city burnt down. The lunatic emperor was blamed for the calamity. To save himself from the anger of the mob, Nero blamed the Christians for the fire. A handful were rounded up by the soldiers. By means of torture, confessions and accusations of those involved were obtained. Thus, Nero turned the tragedy of a burnt city to a spectacle for his brutal subjects by the crucifixion of Christians in the circus. He had the crucified Christians covered with pith and had them ignited as human torches to light up the night festivities. Both Peter and Paul died in the persecution of Nero. Tacitus the Roman historian tells us that the victims Were many. However the persecution was limited to Rome. It ended with the suicide of Nero in 68 A.D.

Then followed Domitian, Trajan, Marcus Aurelius, Septimius Severus, Maximin of Thrace, Valerian, Decius.

Ethics:

     The Eucharist is the centre and summit of the Christian life. If we think of Mass as something forced to attend by the law (legal constraint), then we really miss the point. It is a privilege to be invited to take part in the Lord’s Supper, to share a meal with Him, to experience (as in any good family meal) the reality of belonging to the same family. We all need rules, coaxing and coercion, we cannot be left to our moods, likes and dislikes, whims and fancies.

     Eucharist began with the Lord’s Supper. After the death and Resurrection of Jesus, something totally unexpected and humanly inexplicable happened–they experienced Jesus as alive among them in a new way. They understood the teaching of Jesus with new eyes and new hearts; they came together to pray, to share their experiences of Jesus. At these meetings  (Agape-meals), they shared meals, reached out to the needy.

     This was the setting of the early Eucharist.  We inherited this tradition–not to watch or hear, drop a coin to the collection and go home. We come to share table fellowship with Jesus and with one another, and to learn to treat one another with love and respect, as the Body of Christ. We lost a lot of initial purity of faith.  Are we living witnesses to Jesus’ life and teaching? Like the first Christians, are we “of one heart and one soul“?  “They sold their possessions and shared them with the needy.  They shared meals with joyful hearts“(Ac 2:42; 4:36, in fulfillment of (Lk 6:20). But we watch or hear the Eucharist from far; we are not personally involved in it. Had Jesus this in mind? Would not an act of mercy or service help us to meet Christ better than the average liturgy?

       Jesus left us not an empty ceremony, but a way of life–whole way of life based on truth, love, forgiveness and service. Loving and serving one another is never easy. He did not start the last supper by getting into special robes, but by washing the soiled feet of his disciples (something which only slaves were expected to do in his culture; hence the shock of Peter and others when Jesus knelt before them to do this).

     Liturgy is not mainly about books and rituals; it is about community building.  The Eucharist is the celebration of God’s love and forgiveness by a community that tries to grow in love and forgiveness. The priest is at the service of building such a community; he is not a pear whose responsibilities lie most in the correct handling of ritual. To the degree that we (like the early Christians) move from possessiveness to sharing, from

Discrimination to openness, from division to unity, from indifference to service of the least, we become a Eucharistic community. 

     Personally, we can make our Mass meaningful in the following ways: i)Forgive from your heart; if you find it difficult, ask God’s help. ii)See if you can help people needier than  yourself; do  not reduce your generosity to the few coins or notes you  put in the collection box. iii)Pay attention to the Word of God.  God longs to talk to you, to heal you, give you what you need  today. iv) Communion  is  not just an act of swallowing  the  consecrated host.  It is a commitment to see yourself and every  other  human being  as the Body of Christ.

PHILOSOPHY:

I shall provide a few thoughts from Existentialism, namely with Gabriel MARCEL, who is my favourite thinker.

GABRIEL MARCEL

Introduction:

What is philosophy? He phile tes sophias=love of  wisdom (cf.Pythagoras, Cicero, Tusc.). The starting-point is WONDER. We begin with wonder, and end up with the reflection: How to explain the multiplicity of phenomena? How to reduce many to one, multiplicity to unity? Mythology is pre-philosophical reflection. What is Existentialism? It is reflection on the particular condition of Man. Philosophy was proceeding through abstraction in three degrees. Now it is concerned with the concrete situation of Man. It leads to ask questions (‘cur-iosity’), when the crisis-shock comesm, again questions. Our response to the problem of One and Many—to reduce multiplicity to unity.

The starting-point was post-war crisis. Despair, anguish, forlornness, dread.  During the First World War (1938-1940), in the Red Cross Society, Marcel  experienced terror and horror of war, the pain, the agony,  the cries for help touched him to the core. Persons were regarded as “objects”, like the cogs in the wheels of the military machinery. These heart-rending experiences stimulated his reflections on the meaning of human existence. The result was his neo-Socratic philosophy of man intended to point the way for a new order where human values such as love, fidelity and mutual under­standing would apply a soothing balm to the “broken world”.

The Dane Sören Aabey KIERKEGAARD, known as the founder-father/chief originator of existentialism, has contributed at least three things: i)interest in feelings, like boredom, dread, and anxiety (angoisse); ii)his Christian faith and his anti-clericalism; and iii)most important from our point of view, his ideas on existence.

Existentialism is humanism. The central datum for Marcel’s reflection is the value and significance of interpersonal relationships (intersubjectivity), not “inner world” or self-concentration/introspection. Gabriel MARCEL arcel is classified as “Catholic existentialist” (by Jean-Paul SARTRE), but he himself repudiated the label. His philosophy has been suggested to be neo-Socratic, which he accepted because of his questioning/interrogating attitude. Gabriel MARCEL is one of the great thinkers of contemporary times.

Metaphysics, not in its traditional sense, as a philosophy of the abstract, of the essence, of system (G.M. calls it “philosophie de pensée pensée”), but as a concrete approach, reflection on human experience in its totality, a description at the same time phenomenological and metaphenomenological of the existential situation of Man. The central datum of metaphysics is the incarnation of Man, as linked to a body.

Here there is a consequence of this ontological approach for the epistemological field: philosophical knowledge is not adequation (or intentional conformity) between the knowing subject and the known object, but it is a mode of participation in Being, which founds and envelops it.

His philosophy reflects the inquietude and anguish/dread of the situation in which he lived, during the World War and in its aftermath. His reflection is clear in thought, depth of analysis and expression, and particularly in his concern for engagement, intersubjective communion, dialogue/dyadic relation, participation in the world. It is not a system of set theses. Existentialism is a new way of philosophizing. It is a reaction against Idealism, Empiricism and Positivism. It deals with the concrete human condition. It is a philosophy of life.

His Life: Born in Paris, in the quartier of the plain Monceau, on December 7, 1889. His father, Henri Marcel, was a Catholic turned agnostic, a state counsellor and for a time French Ambassador to Sweden (Stockholm), later Director of the Beaux-Arts, Bibliotheque Nationale and of the Musées Nation­aux. His mother, from a Jewish family, died when he was only four years-old. He was brought up by his auntie, a convert to liberal Protes­tantism, who became his father’s second wife, his step-mother, and played an important role in the development of his mind and character. Till his marriage with Jacqueline Boegner (she died on November 13, 1947), he dwelt there. When he was eight years old, Marcel spent a year with his father at Stockholm, soon after his return to Paris he was sent to the Lycée Carnot. He was brilliant, but he dedicated himself more to music. He started composing at an early age and writing plays. After his studies at the Lycée, he went to Sorbonne and in 1910 obtained Aggregation in Philosophy. After his bacchalaureat and licenciate of philosophy, he completed his diploma of Superior Studies in 1909 with Lévy-Bruhl on “Les Idées métaphysiques de Coleridge dans leurs rapports avec la philosophie de Schelling”.  This choice of theme indicates already his taste for the English metaphysicians. (Marcel wrote a thesis relating Coleridge’s Metaphysical Ideas with Schelling’s Philoso­phy).  Later he studied philosophy at Sorbonne, in Paris, attaining his Agrégation de Philosophie in 1910, but he never com­pleted his doctoral Thesis (on the necessary conditions for the intelligibility of religious thought).  He was a free-lance writer and a thinker. He wrote several dramas. He worked as a reader for two Paris publishers, Plon and Grasset, and was the editor of Plon’s Feux Croisés series (a collection of translations of works by notable contemporary foreign writers) from 1927. In 1948 Marcel won the Grand Prix de Littérature of the French Academy. In 1949-1950 Marcel gave the Gifford lectures at Aberdeen and William James lectures at Harvard University in 1961. In 1956 Marcel received the Goethe Prize and in 1958 the Grand Prix National des Lettres, the German Booksellers’ Peace Prize in 1964, and the Erasmus Prize in 1969.  He was elected a member of the Institut de France and of the Académie des Sciences Morales et Politiques, an officer of the Légion d’Honneur, a commander of the Ordre des Arts et des Lettres and of the Ordre des Palmes Académiques, he received the honour of Grand Croix in the Ordre National du Mérite in 1972. The renowned philoso­pher, musician and playwright breathed his last in Paris, at the age of 83, on October 8, 1973.

Methodology: It is not a system of cubbyholes or a pyramid of billiard balls, but “concrete approaches” (not imposing a formula or Procrustean definitions and norms), providing a series of solutions to problems. They are responses to urgent inner demands. He wrote plays, essays, articles. The actual process of reflection counts rather than results. It is an analysis of the labyrinth of reality.  

His Works: He was a renowned concert pianist. He wrote about twenty dramas. Through dramas, Marcel presented man in real life-situations, frustrated, alienated, bewildered and rootless, when he cuts himself off from his fellowmen  and  from God. He underscored man’s deepest longing for friendship, fideli­ty and communion with others. He wrote: Metaphysical Journal, Being and Having, Homo Viator, The Mystery of Being, From Refusal to Invocation, Gifford Lectures on the The Mystery of Being. He followed diary method/phenomenological.

Influences: Marcel was strongly influenced by the sudden death of his mother when he was only four years old. It was an experience of irreparable loss. Being shy, sensitive by nature and delicate in health, Marcel endured an unhappy home life. He starved for friend­ship and love. He volunteered himself for the military service during the First World War (1914-1918), but due to his delicate health, he could only work in the Red Cross as a messenger to convey the sad message to the families of soldiers who were found dead, wounded and “missing”. There he developed his concern for the human beings and realized the emptiness of rarefied abstract idealism and disincarnated ideologies.

Conversion: He felt spiritual vacuum in his life. His experiences in the Red Cross brought him face to face with the phenomenon of death. He started reading about conversion to Catholicism. At the invi­tation of the French intellectual Francois Mauriac, he embraced Catholicism. After a long search for answers that haunted him since his childhood, he was baptized at the age of 39 in 1933.

Marcel’s Background and Approaches:

            At the beginning Marcel was influenced by William E. Hocking and Josiah Royce, American philosophers, as well as by Henri Bergson, Marcel soon perceived that an abstract system, which equates being with thought is a traitor to reality. Such a totally impersonal, desiccated and artificial abstraction offers man no hope, no meaning or purpose in the world. At best, it engulfs him.  Carte­sian  ”Cogito, ergo sum” reduces man to a mere thinking being.  Marcel followed the phenomenological method and strove to ascend from the concrete experiences, like faith, hope, fidelity, love to the genuine Encounter with the Absolute THOU by way of I-Thou relationship. He followed a Socratic method, for philosophy for him is not a closed system, but a constant probing, question­ing and revising. Marcel develops no system by a deductive process, but a series of ‘concrete approaches’, which are convergent and can be regarded as contributing towards a general interpretation of human experience. They are not solutions to the problems. For him, philosophical exploration is a very personal affair, we cannot simply separate the result from the exploration and pass it on as impersonal truth” (Cf.Frederick Coppleston, History of Phi­losophy, bk.3, vol.9, New York, 1974, p.330).

   His experience in the Red Cross Society brought him to the notion of relationism and need of fraternity and intersubjectivi­ty.  The world has neglected the human person and has considered it as a cog in the wheel. Hence he took the remedial approach of I-Thou–when I go out of myself and regard others as Thou, I exercise my freedom and both of us grow in mutual love and recog­nition.  According to Marcel, there is in each one of us an urgent inner need which requires recognition–”a need for transcendence“–every being is constituted in such a way that s/he clamours for the Absolute and Unconditioned Being, God. Through my love and fidelity to the other, we both begin to par­ticipate in the Unconditioned Being himself. In the exploration of this relationship, we re-discover the personal Transcendent Absolute.  Thus, the need for transcendence is fulfilled. Marcel ap­proaches are not merely horizontal, but also vertical to the Absolute Thou.

     “A Broken World“:  He wrote in 1933. In our everyday life we are dominated by a search for truth (like extracting a pure metal from a mixed ore). There are various effective methods to arrive at truth. A person who does not follow these methods is in danger of losing himself/herself, like a no man’s land, where the difference between truth and error, reality and dream tends to vanish away. We are living in a broken world.  It is like a broken watch–the mainspring has stopped working. Nothing has changed, everything is in place, but put the watch to your ear, and you do not hear any ticking.  The world, the world of human creatures, must have had a heart at one time, but today you would say the heart has stopped beating  (The Mystery of Being, Harvill Press, London, 1950, p.25).

     In the words of the heroine Christiane in his play “A Broken World“(Le Monde Casse), gives a fitting introduction to the ills of the present day world. She is a personification of the mass ‘dis-ease and anguish’–she is a “fashionable lady, smart and witty but busy rushing life that she seems so much at home in obviously masks an inner grief, an anguish which breaks through to the surface in her speech” (p.27).

     Human society is becoming like a anthill. In the growingly complex organization, the human urge  for transcendence is lost. Each one of  us  is treated  as an agent towards the progress of the society–we  are registered  or  enrolled  for it till life  lasts.  M. speaks of “nudity“–man  is stripped by the society of all  protection  and suffers from social nakedness. The underlying factor is fear. But in the presence of a real God, this fear is linked to our feeling for the sacred only. In today’s world man is becoming less human, more like a function. The totalitarian state can take him over, like a giant Octopus with its tentacles reaching out in all directions–the state arrogantly invades the sacred precincts of individual human rights. The ‘functional man’ is demeaned, dehu­manized.  In today’s state everything is organized, systematized and categorized with efficiency.

     Man is an agglomeration of functions. The intrinsic dignity and sacredness of the human being has now been replaced by his functioned value. Man is no longer considered in terms of his humanness.  Man’s dignity is also not accorded its place among entities. Man evaluates himself almost unconsciously from the viewpoint   of   three   functions   in society:  a)Industrial function–he  serves this function perhaps at a meaningless  job. b)Biological  function–through  this function  he  degrades  the sexual  act to a purely physical encounter which results in  col­lapse  of marriage and family. c)Social function–he serves as  a consumer,  voter  and taxpayer. His capacity to love, admire and hope dries up, the functional man even loses the ability/desire to transcend his situation of alienation and captivity. Life in a functionalized  world  becomes  a process without  a  purpose,  a utilization of means with no clearly defined end. When the  sense
of  dignity and purposefulness is lost, nothing  ultimately  mat­ters.

Technocracy: Contemporary Man experiences a throwness  into the  world,  a  gnawing homelessness. He  feels  an  overwhelming estrangement  and alienation. This alienation is due to the fact that the world is increasingly under the leadership of technology and as a result human life tends to lose its existential  weight. In a world where technology enjoys absolute primacy, a desecral­izing  process inevitably sets in, that is directed against  life and  its manifestations, and particularly against the  family  and everything connected with it. Thus, technology reduces man’s worth and the world to the calculable, it alienates and estranges them.

Devaluation of Life: Marcel discovers something within the human creature that protests against the sort of violation of which he is the victim. This protesting state of Man justifies our state­ment that the world we live in is a broken world. Our world is given to the power of words such as person and democracy–which tend to lose their authentic significance. The realities for which these words stand are dwindling away, just like the infla­tion of money when goods are scarce. Depreciation today of both words and currency corresponds to a general failure of trust and confidence. Self-destruction of the world can take place if man refuses to reflect and to imagine. If man had imagined the evils brought about the two World Wars, they would have become impossible. Failure to reflect is not merely the fault of a few individuals, but it is due to the radical incapacity to draw conclusions from the events that were happening in the last fifty years.

SELF AND BEING:

Self as being: Man necessarily questions: “Who am I?”  With this question I interrogate about my own being. Man is a factual being, since he exists, but he is not mere ‘sum-being’. He is free, but not totally free. He has his existence, which is to be handled in trusteeship. He realizes then that he is not merely a sum, but a sursum. His horizontal dimension puts him in relation to himself and other beings/things, while idimension puts him in connection with God. According to Marcel, man’s life can be considered from two standpoints: Present and Past. In the past, life appears as something that can be narrated by reason of its very essence. Life cannot be reproduced by a narrative, in as much  as it has been actually lived. But it can be recaptured as particles irradiated by flashes of memory. My life cannot be identified with the notes on my diary nor with my work. Even my acts, which are recorded in objective reality are unable to tell exactly the realities that are within me. In so far as I am still living it, my life appears to me as something I can consecrate or sacrifice and the more I feel that I am striving towards an end, the more alive I feel. It is, therefore, essential that my life be articulated on a reality which gives it a meaning and a trend, and as it were justifies it. To give one’s life is neither to part with one’s self nor to do away with one’s self. It is to respond to a call. Death can, thus, be life in the supreme sense. His life is infinitely beyond the consciousness he has of it as any given moment. It is essentially unequal in itself and tran­scendent. Life is essentially ungraspable that it eludes him in all directions. It is as if man is condemned to act in a play that he has not read. Life is not found in our path, we cannot decide in order to avail ourselves. Awareness of one’s self as living is indeed to be aware of a former existence and the role of reflection is to recognize the prior participation with a reality which consciousness cannot encompass. As it goes beyond consciousness of self, it is met with in two directions:  a)Relationship  to others; and b)relationship to one’s self. Conscious­ness of self appears only in pretentiousness, aggressiveness, humility. When the living link connecting me and another is broken by overpassing the I-him opposition. The consciousness of self appears as the breaking of the inner city, which ego forms with itself, with its past. Here comes the role of intersubjec­tivity.

PRIMARY REFLECTION AND SECONDARY REFLECTION:

   Philosophic thought is reflective. Reflection occurs when life faces a certain obstacle or is being checked by a certain break in the continuity of experience. At that juncture, it becomes necessary for life to take recourse to reflection in order to restore the unity lost by the obstacle. In this case, reflection appears as promoter of life. It discovers that I am not someone nor am I someone in particular, though I am led to recognize that the ego that I am, which is not someone, cannot  be set as either existent or imaginary.

     Marcel   distinguishes two degrees or types of thinking, viz. Primary and Secondary Reflection.

PRIMARY REFLECTION:

   Primary reflection is characterized as abstract, analytical, objective, universal and verifiable. The thinking subject in primary reflection is not the individual human person, but the thinker himself. It deals with the realm of problematic. The distinguishing feature of the problematic approach to reality is the separation of the questioner from the data about which he questions. The data of primary reflection lie in the public domain and are equally available to any qualified observer. It tries to reduce my love or faith to a mere bundle of experiences, which can be understood and exhausted.

SECONDARY REFLECTION:

     Secondary reflection is concrete, individual, heuristic and open. Strictly speaking, it is concerned, not with objects, but with presences. Its contemplation begins with wonder and aston­ishment. It reclaims open to its object as a lover does to his beloved. It seeks a richer understanding by a return to the unity of  deep  human experiences as life, being,  love,  appreciation, fidelity, faith. Moreover, it asserts its rights of participation over observation, encounter over objectification, concrete exist­ence over abstraction. Only with the aim of secondary  reflection can we have unity of experience.

PROBLEM AND MYSTERY:

What is man? Some philosophers have fallen into  materialism or idealism. In order to avoid these two pitfalls, Marcel distin­guishes  problem  from mystery. Problem belongs to the primary reflection, whereas mystery belongs to the secondary reflection.

PROBLEM:

     For Marcel Problem is a question which be answered purely objectively, without involving the questioner himself. For exam­ple I may be interested in solving a mathematical problem, but in solving  it I hold it purely objectively, leaving myself  out  of the  picture. I am the subject, the problem is the object.  I do not enter into the object. Solving could be done by anybody or by a machine. Thus, a problem moves purely on the plane of objectiv­ity. But if the problem is to put a man in the space and then  to bring  him back safely, it is better that more people  tackle  it objectively.

MYSTERY:

   For Marcel, mystery is not revealed truth nor the unknow­able.  Mystery is a “something in which I am myself involved and which is therefore thinkable only as a sphere where the  distinc­tion  between what is in me and what is before me loses its  sig­nificance  and its initial validity“. Mystery involves the being itself of the questioner in such a way that he cannot disregard his own self. Mystery is that which cannot be solved or explain­able but only experienceable in our lives.

   If I ask “What am I?” and answer “I am a soul or mind“, then I objectify my body as something over against me, something which I can never possess, as I can possess an umbrella. It  is  then quite  impossible to reconstitute the unity of the human  person. “I am my body” (Moi, c’est mon corps). But I am not identifiable with the body when it is distinguished from ‘soul’ and objecti­fied as a thing. If I separate myself into soul and body, objec­tify them and then try to link them together, I shall never be able to do so. I can grasp the unity of myself only from within. Therefore, I should explore on the level of second reflection “that massive, indistinct sense of one’s total existence“, produced by primary reflection. It can be illustrated thus:  John and Mary love each other, they think of each other, but they do not think of love in an abstract way. There is a concrete  unity of  mutual loving in which both of them are involved.  When John begins to stand back from the actual experience of loving, objec­tifies this love, lived by them within  a  concrete  situation, asks: “What is love?”, he tries to analyse love into  constituent elements  or  he interprets it as something else.  This analytic process is an example of first reflection and love is considered as setting a problem to be solved. When John sees the remoteness of this analysis from the actual experience of loving and returns to  the actual togetherness of love, the communion or  unity,  he tries  to grasp it in reflection but as from within, as a  lived personal relationship. This is an example of second reflection.

     Marcel admits that second reflection can easily degenerate into first reflection. Marcel is not an absolute idealist but the project of grasping in reflection what is the first present in feeling, is a basic feature of his philosophy. For example, my relation to my body which is sui generis and irreducible is explained on the level of ‘feeling’ (Cf.Frederick Coppleston, The History of Philosophy, book 3, vol.9, Image  Books,  New  York, 1974, p.333). On the level of the first reflection, the unity of this feeling experience is broken up by analytic thought. But it does not mean it is devoid of value. It can serve practical ends. But in order to grasp the sui generis relation between myself and my  body  it  is necessary to return  to  the  original  feeling-experience at the level of second reflection.

PARTICIPATION IN BEING:

     The second reflection is an exploration of the metaphysical significance of experience. For example, John sees love as an act of transcendence on the part of the human person and as a par­ticipation in Being.  Marcel asks: What does this experience reveal to me of myself as a human person and of Being? He insists that Being is not and cannot be made into an object.         In  case Mary, the beloved of John dies, John can  transcend the level of empirical evidence with love and hope in union  with Mary and be confident in Mary’s continued existence and of  their future  reunion.  For Marcel, it is grounded in a mysterious presence, which is a participation in Being. Though bond is broken on the physical plane, yet it persists on the metaphysical plane for “creative  fidelity”, which is the  active  perpetuation  of presence (Ibidem, p.335).

HUMAN RELATIONS:

     Marcel makes a distinction between liberty and fidelity in the context of human relations. Liberty is the primary subject-object relation and fidelity is the ultimate subject-object relation. If one can relive in reflection the experience of fidelity, it is the most promising approach to the exploration of Being.  It is the existence of another person which gives  me  my primary notion of existence. It is my genuine response to another person  that initiates and sustains the creation of my own  being in  fidelity. Reflection upon this central core of moral  experi­ence shows the way to a metaphysics of Being.

I-THOU RELATION:

     In case of first reflection I can exist and act  inauthenti­cally as a faceless individual.  I am like an atom caught up in a whirlwind.  Here I treat another as atom where I do  not  reflect others, but treat them as a machine or a function for my  pleasure and benefit. But in second level of reflection I treat other as thou  and see  him  as a person. I become present to the other in  a  mutal openness  and  self-giving, where we are no longer  two  isolated entities  or strangers. I no longer treat other as an object.  

PRESENCE:

     This concept gets appropriate meaning only at  the  mystery level.  It is found where there is I-thou relation. Marcel cites an example of a conductor whom we have habitually to deal with in the train or bus. At the start, this man has only the functional reality bound up with the fact of punching the tickets. But suppose he is caught up with an ailment or moral distress, the link between him and us ceases to be purely functional. He really becomes a human being for us, a presence. If I ask him: “What is the matter?”, and he answers me, we become really present to  one another at least for a brief moment. It is the dawn of intersub­jectivity (or mutual openness). When we become presentially aware of one another, we can no longer be considered as two terms external to one another. We are on the verge of becoming interior to one another. For Marcel, presence implies much more than a mere “being there alongside others“.

ENCOUNTER:

     It is not something accidental, that takes place by chance, but has a deep metaphysical implication. It is something that involves, as it were, a mingling of two presences. To encounter someone is to be near to or with him at least for the moment. It means being a co-presence. A genuine meaningful dialogue takes place between gracious I and thou. This  encounter is  a “reciprocal intercourse of I and thou, who get to know  one another as persons“.

INTERSUBJECTIVITY:

   In his Presence and Immortality, the notion of intersubjectivity is developed. “Presence is intersubjective“, says Marcel. The subject is treated, not like an object, but as the magnetic centre of presence. At the root of presence, there is a being who takes me into consideration, while the object does not.  Presence belongs to the being who is capable of giving himself.

     Marcel says, “in order to grow we must open out to the other and different beings and must be capable of meeting them without allowing himself to be dominated or neutralised“. This is what he calls  ’Inter-Subjectivity’.

BEING AND HAVING:

   Often man tends to forget the mystery element in his own life and in the life of others and tries to live only in the domain of the ‘problem’. He is more concerned with the horizontal dimension of our life, our involvement with things, than the vertical dimension: to be.

BEING:

   Marcel’s use of the word ‘Being’ is somewhat perplexing.  He insists that Being is not and cannot be made into an  object,  a direct object of intuition. It can only be alluded to indirectly. Rather  it is an exploration of the metaphysical significance  of experience.

HAVING:

The verb ‘to have’ means that I have the power to keep to myself or give up. In all having, even in the case of most com­plete intimate possession of properties, there is a tension between the exterior and the interior. When I possess an external object  I am involved in anxiety. Even a thing is desired, the desire is also a form of having. This desire corresponds to the anxiety about losing what one possesses.

Marcel points out that to live on the level of having is to renounce what I am and be one what I have. I become reduced to a thing.  On the other hand, it is not possible for me to stand apart from the world and draw or pull the world so that it becomes absorbed in me.

There is a tension between having and being. The nature  of human body is such that it cannot be completely reduced to someth­ing  we have. It is intimately connected with our own  existence. It is something animate and the animate entity as it is cannot be separated  from my existence. The ideas and opinions can be  possessed  but  things  which I have do not have  the  intimate  and unique connection which I have in regard to my body.

It is difficult to say: “I have my body“. We should rather say: “I am my body“. At the same time, I cannot say, “I am merely my body“, for I have some independence from the body. It is for these reasons that there is a tension between having and being.

The themes of being and having have their parallels in the realm of perception and cognition. He advocates some form of realism.  My scenes are responsive to being and they bear witness to Being. My body does not belong to me but extends into the world beyond into which it carries me. Thus, he invites me to partici­pate in the pursuit of Being.

When a person identifies himself with some transient object, he loses his life and being with it. “The more we allow ourselves to be  the slaves of ‘having’, the more we shall  let  ourselves fall  a prey to the gnawing anxiety which having betokens”  (Homo Viator, 78).

Another aspect of yielding to this ‘having’ is the losing of men  in  ’everydayness’. The majority of men  tend  to  gravitate into a fixed round of neatly compartmentalised daily events  which prevent  the insertion of spontaneity, excitement and  wonder  in their  life.  It gives the impression that there  is  nothing  of value beyond this routine events of life. Man loses himself in an abstract,  regular  routine. Such  ’everydayness’  may  encourage nihilism, boredom by preventing us to see real values beyond  the functional domain that we fulfill.

HIS VIEW ON FREEDOM

In general, freedom is self-determination to do good.  Exis­tentialists  hold  that man is not free but he  becomes  free  by choosing  each and every moment. Human freedom  integrally  taken has three dimensional freedom that is personal, social and  tran­scendental freedom.

Marcel’s understanding of freedom is different–it developed during  the  First World War where he served as  a  messenger  to inform the families of the soldiers who were found dead or wound­ed  or missing–it was there that he understood our freedom  only through intersubjectivity: It means when I treat the other person as  thou I discover my own freedom. As Marcel says, “When I  con­sider another as thou, I treat him and apprehend him qua freedom. I  apprehend him qua freedom because he is also freedom  and  not only  nature (facticity). What is more I help him in a sense to be  freed,  I collaborate with his freedom”.

Marcel presents four kinds of freedom with the aim of bring­ing out man’s true freedom: 1)A capricious child does not want to eat/go  to school–this is not real freedom for the child  really does not know what it wants. 2)A young man want to manage his own affairs,  do  what he wants–here there is autonomy,  freedom  to conquer. 3)Freedom of Choice: When one chooses a partner in life. 4)Freedom  of  Commitment: A rich man looks after  her  bed-ridden  wife dutifully and faithfully he commits himself  to  her without  marrying another. Freedom coincides with love  which  no longer seeks itself but with the other, it is self-creating, self-transcending freedom.

Freedom is not mere autonomy. It is the domain of having.  A man  of  talents and money can do whatever he wishes  but  cannot waste  his talents or money. A person is really free who is  able to  act authentically and integrally and realize the fullness  of Being.  Freedom is neither a task. In every  concrete  situation, man  is called to decide the way in which he must commit  himself in  that situation. It is an answer. If one thinks of freedom  as power  he  will be a fanatic, dictator and may lead  to  terrible consequences.  His  passion will rule over his thinking  and  his being and he will be a prisoner in the solitude of his pride.  He is  not  free  for  he has used his freedom  to  become  his  own ‘slave’. Freedom is essentially something that proceeds from  the inner person. Even the chained prisoner can have it if he without bitterness  uses his freedom to give meaning to  this  imprisoned life.

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD

Gabriel  Marcel denies the very possibility of  theodicy  as does  Kierkegaard–God cannot and must not be judged, for  judge­ment is only possible regarding essence. That explains why  every kind  of  theodicy necessarily implies a  justification.  So  God cannot be justified. He further says: “The thought that justifies is the thought that has not yet been elevated to love and to  the faith that claims to transcend the mind. Theodicy is Atheism” .

Marcel  points out that the proofs of the existence  of  God have  not  always seemed convincing, even to  the  historians  of philosophy  who  expounded them most minutely.  ”The  proofs  are ineffectual  precisely when they would be most necessary to  con­vince an unbeliever, then they seem to serve no useful  purpose”, says Marcel.

“If  a man has experience the presence of God, not only  has he  no need of proofs, he may even consider proofs as a slur   on what  is for him sacred evidence“. The reasons for the  existence of  God  are useless because they do not do  what  they  actually claim. In actuality they are deceptions. These arguments  presup­pose that we have already grounded ourselves on God and they  are bringing  God  to the level of discursive thought. He rejects the ways of St.Thomas,  saying: “These  are not ways but blind ways, as one can have blind  wind­ows”.  Marcel specifically denies the viability of the  arguments for  God’s existence from causality. “If we claim to make of  the idea  of  cause a transcendent use, we arrive at a  dead  end  or
which amounts to the same thing, we get lost in a labyrinth”. The words  ’transcendent  use’ mean a use which  extends  beyond  the domain  of  instrumentality strictly speaking–that is,  that  in which  man  exercises his mastery. He says: “It is to  be  feared indeed that the idea of causality is inseparable from the  exist­ence  of  a  being provided with instrumental powers:  it  is  in short,  bio-teleological”. For Marcel, then, to regard God  as  a cause is to demean him and to reduce him to the level of a  maker and user of tools. Marcel’s God is not instrumental producer  but he  is  the centre of all things. He is the infinite  Person  who communicates  being to us and we are participants in  being  from him.  We also seek his personal presence as the goal of  our  de­sire,  as the only way of bridging our inquietude to  its  proper fulfillment“.

He  is  not prepared to regard God as an object,  the  existence  of which is asserted as a conclusion that solves a  prob­lem. Faith is a matter not of believing that but of believing in. And  God is for Marcel, as for Kierkegaard, “The Absolute  Thou’. He is thus encountered rather than proved.

ABSOLUTE THOU AND FIDELITY:

Marcel believes that it is on the level of mystery that  man can  discover  his authentic personhood. And so it is only  in  a genuine  I-Thou relationship, in that encounter on the  plane  of intersubjectivity  that I can engage in such  personal  relation­ships  as disponibility, fidelity and love. When a person  enters into  communion with another, he thereby transcends the level  of having, the level of object, and rise to the sphere of Being. Every  human  being has an existence of Being, which  is  an orientation  to the Absolute Thou. He constantly desires him  and reaches out for him in all his activities. But there are  various ways  in  which  the  orientation to  God  can  be  appropriated, i.e.that are various concrete approaches to God. God is ‘Absolute Presence’  and can be approached through intersubjectivity  rela­tionships such as love and creative fidelity which are  sustained by and point to him.Through his spiritual availability, love and fidelity to the other  and  his  to him, they both begin to  participate  in  the unconditioned Being who is Absolute Thou or God itself. Or a  man can  encounter God in worship and prayer, in invocation  and  response. These various ways are not of course mutually  exclusive. They are ways of coming to experience the divine presence.

We cannot experience or have relation with Absolute Thou   without having relation with other people. When we are totally committed to each other we reach out for an absolute and complete Fidelity, Love and Disponibility. By beginning on the plane of human we mutually assist each other in our ascent to the Infinite.  Thus, in the exploration of the relationships which arise on the plane of intersubjectivity I discover ‘God’ as the personal transcendent Absolute. In fidelity we find that we become Absolute and totally committed,  without any reservations whatsoever. He explains: “I cannot  base  my argument on the effort of my own  will.  I must admit then that something unalterable is implied in the relation itself. I must start from Being itself–from commitment to  God”. This  act of genuine commitment is something transcendent in  its very  nature  because it is beyond my own limited powers.  It  is made possible only because of my complete and unquestioning faith in God.

     Like Abraham, the knight of faith, I place my complete trust in God or the Absolute Thou. Being conscious of my insufficiency I call upon God himself to serve as a ground the fidelity, which I exhibit towards my neighbour. Hence this ground of fidelity seems unshakable when it is based on a certain appeal delivered from the depths of my own insufficiency. As it is the most stringent commitment it cannot be a matter of counting on oneself to cope with this unbounded commitment but in this act I extend an infi­nite credit to him to whom I did so.

My fidelity becomes possible towards my fellowmen because my fidelity is a part of Absolute Fidelity who is present in me through my faith.  Marcel says: “To display my real fidelity towards my fellows, I must give myself completely to God, who is the Faithful One. For this reason fidelity can only rest upon faith in God, and this faith is the highest existential relation in which I transcend myself“.

     When my fidelity is in constant communion  with  the  very source  of  fidelity, my fidelity is constantly  revitalized  and becomes  a “creative fidelity”. Such a fidelity is  characterized by  those  rare qualities of humility and patience.  Fidelity  is unmistakable and its face shines with clearest light and she goes hand  in hand with patience and humility. Thus, fidelity,  faith, love and hope are the aspects through which we can experience the Absolute Thou.

FAITH:

     Fidelity  is  manifestly impossible without a faith  in  the other, for faith is the highest expression of fidelity. It can be understood  in  two  different ways: a)As  conviction;  and  b)As commitment.

     As conviction, faith is still on the level of the problemat­ic and that of having. When understood as commitment, faith is that which is far more enriching and productive on the ontologi­cal plane, because it carries with it the richness of a binding obligation. “Through faith as genuine commitment, I engage in a mystical encounter with the other. Since such an encounter carries with it a complete bundling together of all the forces of being, it adds a new dimension both to me and the other. By becoming spiritually available to my neighbour I overcome the restrictions of my egocentricity and discover at this moment the Absolute Thou.  I find that God is the very ground of my faith and fidelity; I invoke him and enter into a loving communion with him“.

LOVE:

     Whenever there is faith and fidelity, there is love: love of God by man, love of man by God and love of man by his fellowmen. The mutuality of this reciprocal love gives meaning and authen­ticity to men’s existence in the world. All true love of the other must ultimately be based on the love of God. It is this love,  which gives value to man’s actions. Only love makes man to go out of himself to others. And so really love a creature, is to love him in God. Marcel says: “Love is the active  refusal to treat itself as subjective and it is  in  this refusal  that  it cannot be separated from faith, in fact  it  is faith”. Therefore, it is only through love we can treat others as ourselves”.
HOPE:

     The genuine love always carries with it a necessary concom­itant, namely hope. For it is hope which gives meaningfulness to man’s existence. Man hopes in God and the future which makes him to have an aim or purpose in life. If a man has no hope and does not experience love, he will either commit suicide or be addicted to drugs. Love plays an important role but if he does not have hope, he cannot love others. Hope is like breathing. 

     It is mainly through hope I discover my relationships to the Absolute Thou. Therefore, man is full of hope. Thus, he refuses to agree with Albert Camus’ thesis that Man is con­demned to live hopelessly in a world of absurdity.

EVALUATION:

     Gabriel Marcel, a theistic existentialist, has made a great contribution to the philosophy of life. He is inspired by the feelings of love and devotion and thinks that God can produce in man the principle of creativity by which the world can be ren­dered once more beautiful. He wants to understand philosophy as an expression of the living experience and for that reason, wants to remain close to the intimate testimony of the intensely felt moments of human life. He believes that man’s quest is the pur­suit of what he calls Being.

     As  Michelle  Sciacca pays his highest  tribute  to  Marcel, saying: “Of all the forms of existentialism, Marcel’s is the only one that does not refuse but rather fulfills the experience of  a  Christian  existence“. Yes, he inserted  all  the important Christian values life  faith,  love, fidelity  and hope in his Philosophy to show man’s existence  and dignity.

 Contribution: –Marcel’s  greatest contribution to contemporary  thought  is the bringing of a genuine Philosophy of Hope. He refutes philoso­phers  like Albert CAMUS who said: “Man is condemned to live  hopelessly in a world of absurdity“. He also said that man is doomed to live out his life in an absurd world endlessly plotting to make an object of another, whereas the keynote of Marcel’s vision of life is hope. For him the experience of despair can become the prelude and vehicle for an authentic hope that far transcends mere naive optimism.

      Today man is caught up in the grip of despair, which tears him out of himself and forces him to question the meaning of the existence. Marcel passionately affirms that in love, faith and hope, man encounters Something that  transcends  the ‘purely  natural’. Thus, Marcel shows the road that  leads  from despair to hope–and to God.

      Another important thought of Marcel is I-Thou relation. It is here that one treats another as person, respects him and works for the betterment of the other. In the world of today man has become more and more individualistic and impersonal like a cog in the wheel. With the view of making man more human, Marcel sug­gests I-thou relationship.

To conclude: One can assert that in spite of the limitations of this philosophy, he has contributed much in restoring man to his rightful and meaningful place in reality, insuring thereby his contact with a personal God. Gabriel Marcel, the Great Exis­tentialist Apostle of hope to all mankind has definitely in­fluenced the hearts of thousands and will ever continue to do so in the years to come.

PSYCHOLOGY:

Sigmund Freud

     Sigmund Freud was born in Frieberg, Moravia in 1856, but when he was four years old his family moved to Vienna, where Freud was to live and work until the last year of his life. In 1937 the Nazis annexed Austria, and Freud, who was Jewish, was allowed to leave for England. For these reasons, it was above all with the city of Vienna that Freud’s name was destined to be deeply associated for posterity, founding as he did what was to become known as the ‘first Viennese school’ of psychoanalysis, from which, it is fair to say, psychoanalysis as a movement and all subsequent developments in this field flowed. The scope of Freud’s interests, and of his professional training, was very broad – he always considered himself first and foremost a scientist, endeavouring to extend the compass of human knowledge, and to this end (rather than to the practice of medicine) he enrolled at the medical school at the University of Vienna in 1873. He concentrated initially on biology, doing research in physiology for six years under the great German scientist Ernst Brücke, who was director of the Physiology Laboratory at the University, thereafter specialising in neurology. He received his medical degree in 1881, and having become engaged to be married in 1882, he rather reluctantly took up more secure and financially rewarding work as a doctor at Vienna General Hospital. Shortly after his marriage in 1886 – which was extremely happy, and gave Freud six children, the youngest of whom, Anna, was herself to become a distinguished psychoanalyst. Freud set up a private practice in the treatment of psychological disorders, which gave him much of the clinical material on which he based his theories and his pioneering techniques.
     In 1885-1886 Freud spent the greater part of a year in Paris, where he was deeply impressed by the work of the French neurologist Jean Charcot, who was at that time using hypnotism to treat hysteria and other abnormal mental conditions. When he returned to Vienna, Freud experimented with hypnosis, but found that its beneficial effects did not last. At this point he decided to adopt instead a method suggested by the work of an older Viennese colleague and friend, Josef Breuer, who had discovered that when he encouraged a hysterical patient to talk uninhibitedly about the earliest occurrences of the symptoms, the latter sometimes gradually abated. Working with Breuer, Freud formulated and developed the idea that many neuroses (phobias, hysterical paralyses and pains, some forms of paranoia, etc.) had their origins in deeply traumatic experiences which had occurred in the past life of the patient but which were now forgotten, hidden from consciousness; the treatment was to enable the patient to recall the experience to consciousness, to confront it in a deep way both intellectually and emotionally, and in thus discharging it, to remove the underlying psychological causes of the neurotic symptoms. This technique, and the theory from which it is derived, was given its classical expression in Studies in Hysteria, jointly published by Freud and Breuer in 1895.
     Shortly thereafter, however, Breuer, found that he could not agree with what he regarded as the excessive emphasis which Freud placed upon the sexual origins and content of neuroses, and the two parted company, with Freud continuing to work alone to develop and refine the theory and practice of psychoanalysis. In 1900, after a protracted period of self-analysis, he published The Interpretation of Dreams, which is generally regarded as his greatest work, and this was followed in 1901 by The Psychopathology of Everyday Life, and in 1905 by Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality. Freud’s psychoanalytic theory was initially not well received – when its existence was acknowledged at all it was usually by people who were, as Breuer had foreseen, scandalised by the emphasis placed on sexuality by Freud – and it was not until 1908, when the first International Psychoanalytical Congress was held at Salzburg, that Freud’s importance began to be generally recognised. This was greatly facilitated in 1909, when he was invited to give a course of lectures in the United States, which were to form the basis of his 1916 book Five Lectures on Psycho-Analysis. From this point on Freud’s reputation and fame grew enormously, and he continued to write prolifically until his death, producing in all more than twenty volumes of theoretical works and clinical studies. He was also not adverse to critically revising his views, or to making fundamental alterations to his most basic principles when he considered that the scientific evidence demanded it – this was most clearly evidenced by his advancement of a completely new tripartite (id, ego, and super-ego) model of the mind in his 1923 work The Ego and the Id. He was initially greatly heartened by attracting followers of the intellectual calibre of Adler and Jung, and was correspondingly disappointed personally when they both went on to found rival schools of psychoanalysis – thus giving rise to the first two of many schisms in the movement – but he knew that such disagreement over basic principles had been part of the early development of every new science. After a life of remarkable vigour and creative productivity, he died of cancer while exiled in England in 1939.

The Theory of the Unconscious

     Freud’s theory of the unconscious, then, is highly deterministic, a fact which, given the nature of nineteenth century science, should not be surprising. Freud was arguably the first thinker to apply deterministic principles systematically to the sphere of the mental, and to hold that the broad spectrum of human behaviour is explicable only in terms of the (usually hidden) mental processes or states which determine it. Thus, instead of treating the behaviour of the neurotic as being causally inexplicable – which had been the prevailing approach for centuries – Freud insisted, on the contrary, on treating it as behaviour for which is meaningful to seek an explanation by searching for causes in terms of the mental states of the individual concerned. Hence the significance which he attributed to slips of the tongue or pen, obsessive behaviour, and dreams – all, he held, are determined by hidden causes in the person’s mind, and so they reveal in covert form what would otherwise not be known at all. This suggests the view that freedom of the will is, if not completely an illusion, certainly more tightly circumscribed than is commonly believed, for it follows from this that whenever we make a choice we are governed by hidden mental processes of which we are unaware and over which we have no control.

     The postulate that there are such things as unconscious mental states at all is a direct function of Freud’s determinism, his reasoning here being simply that the principle of causality requires that such mental states should exist, for it is evident that there is frequently nothing in the conscious mind which can be said to cause neurotic or other behaviour. An ‘unconscious’ mental process or event, for Freud, is not one which merely happens to be out of consciousness at a given time, but is rather one which cannot, except through protracted psychoanalysis, be brought to the forefront of consciousness. The postulation of such unconscious mental states entails, of course, that the mind is not, and cannot be, identified with consciousness or that which can be an object of consciousness – to employ a much-used analogy, it is rather structurally akin to an iceberg, the bulk of it lying below the surface, exerting a dynamic and determining influence upon the part which is amenable to direct inspection, the conscious mind.
     Deeply associated with this view of the mind is Freud’s account of the instincts or drives. The instincts, for Freud, are the principal motivating forces in the mental realm, and as such they ‘energise’ the mind in all of its functions. There are, he held, an indefinitely large number of such instincts, but these can be reduced to a small number of basic ones, which he grouped into two broad generic categories, Eros (the life instinct), which covers all the self-preserving and erotic instincts, and Thanatos (the death instinct), which covers all the instincts towards aggression, self-destruction, and cruelty. Thus it is a mistake to interpret Freud as asserting that all human actions spring from motivations which are sexual in their origin, since those which derive from Thanatos are not sexually motivated – indeed, Thanatos is the irrational urge to destroy the source of all sexual energy in the annihilation of the self. Having said that, it is undeniably true that Freud gave sexual drives an importance and centrality in human life, human actions, and human behaviour which was new (and to many, shocking), arguing as he does both that the sexual drives exist and can be discerned in children from birth (the theory of infantile sexuality), and that sexual energy (libido) is the single most important motivating force in adult life. However, even here a crucial qualification has to be added – Freud effectively redefined the term ‘sexuality’ here to make it cover any form of pleasure which is or can be derived from the body. Thus his theory of the instincts or drives is essentially that the human being is energised or driven from birth by the desire to acquire and enhance bodily pleasure.

PERSONALITIES:

GANDHI’S MESSAGE  ON POLITICS

     Of Gandhi, the great scientist Albert Einstein wrote in July 1944 that “generations to come, it may be, will scarcely  believe that such a one as this ever in flesh and blood walked upon this earth” is true. He is one of the most dynamic and saintly figures of modern times and a truly great leader. He was really a  ”great Soul/MAN” (MAHATMA).

     At  the end of a prayer meeting on January 30, 1948,  Gandhi was pleased to hear from his Hindu and Muslim friends that  Delhi had experienced “a reunion of hearts“, but soon after he  touched the hands of Nathuram Vinayak GODSE together, smiled and blessed them,  he fell at the shot of a pistol and died with  a   murmur: “Oh, God“.  Godse, a thirty-five year old editor and publisher of a Hindu Mahasabha weekly in Pune, was bitter that Gandhi made  no demands on Muslims, although he did not hate Gandhi.

     After  50  years, his message still resounds  on  our  ears.  Gandhi  should  lead us today to progress and peace. It  is  dis­heartening to witness national disintegration based on the  wrong notion of religion, politics and human welfare.

     Born  on  October 2, 1869, in the small state  of  Porbandar (Western India), of Karamchand (alias Kaba) Gandhi and  Putlibai, Mohandas  Karamchand Gandhi was the youngest son. He  passed  his childhood in Porbandar (known also as Sudamapuri).  He was medio­cre, but honest student, of sluggish intelligence and raw memory. He married Kasturbai, the daughter of merchant Gokuldas  Makanji. His  marriage lasted sixty-two years. He was shy, but  he  perse­vered in his hard work. When his father died in 1885, his mother took  advice on family matters from a Jain monk, Becharji  Swami, who  helped him go to England. His first days in England were  an agony–everything was strange: people, houses, life-style,  idiom of  the  language,  food. He was homesick, but  he settled  down gradually and started his studies.  He was a conscientious  work­er,  read the prescribed books and was duly called to the Bar  by the  Inner Temple, which later disbarred him because of his  con­viction  in the Indian civil disobedience movement. After  having finished his studies, he returned to India.

     On  his  arrival at Bombay, he was greeted with  the  tragic news  of his mother’s death. He felt that the background  of  his life  had  collapsed. After some hesitation, he began  his  legal practice in the Bombay courts. His first case was a trial of  his courage–to speak in public had always been an ordeal for him. He became tongue-tied and begged to be relieved of his case. He  was offered a commission to go to South Africa to work as lawyer  for an  Indian firm. After arriving to Durban in 1893, he  understood the problem of colour-bar. After completing his task, he  decided to  work  for  his countrymen. They  were  dubbed  contemptuously “coolies” (Gandhi himself was known as “the coolie barrister”}

     But  he won his victory through peaceful means and  came  to India to work for freedom. He had to fight against  untouchabili­ty–he called the scheduled castes “children of God”  (HARIJANS). He  believed  in non-cooperation with the British  Government  of
India.  Love was his weapon, harmony between Hindus  and  Muslims was his aim to be achieved through non-violence, through fast. No bribery,  no deceit, no immoral means. Gandhi opposed the  ”vivi­section” of India into part for the Muslims, part for the Hindus. 
BAPU was shot dead by Godse. 
     In  his political struggle, Gandhi was led by his  religious principle of self-realization.  He narrates his “experiments”  in the spiritual field, from which he has derived power for working in the political field. Therefore, he says, there can be no  room for self-praise, but only for humility by feeling his own limita­tions  and  shortcomings.  Let us hear his own  words:  ”For  me, politics  bereft  of  religion  are absolute  dirt,  ever  to  be shunned.  Politics  concern nations and that which  concerns  the welfare  of  others must be one of the concerns of a man  who  is religiously  inclined,  in other words, a seeker after  God  and Truth….God  and Truth are convertible terms and if anyone  told me  that  God was a God of untruth or a God of  torture  I  would decline  to  worship Him. Therefore in politics also we  have  to establish the Kingdom of Heaven” (YOUNG INDIA, June 18, 1925).

     Being  a sincere seeker of truth, he could not subscribe  to the  methods  of bribery and deceit. For he would say,  by  these methods we cannot enter heaven, much less gain “India‘s freedom“. If  we gain heaven or freedom through these methods, heaven  will not  be heaven and freedom will not be freedom. We should  remain loyal  to  an institution, if it conduces to our growth,  to  the growth of the nation. Otherwise, he would say it clearly, “I hold it my bounden duty to be disloyal to it…”

     It was devotion to Truth that has drawn him into the politi­cal  field.  His experiments in the political field are  but  ex­pression  of  his spiritual life. What he wanted to  achieve  was self-realization,  to see God face to face, to attain MOKSHA  (or  salvation  which  was for him oneness with God and  freedom  from later  incarnations). He lived in pursuit of this goal  (see  The Story of My Experiments with Truth, Phoenix Press, London,  1949, Introduction). 

     This is the end of all his endeavours: to see the  universal and  all-pervading Spirit of Truth face to face. But  one  cannot aspire  after that unless one loves “the meanest of  creation  as oneself“.  Without  the slightest hesitation he  could  say  that ”those  who say that religion has nothing to do with politics  do not  know what religion means[1]” (M.K.Gandhi, The Story of  My  Ex­periments with Truth, “Farewell”, p.420).

     Politicians  of  today are exploiting the ignorance  of  the millions of illiterate people of India for their political  mile­age. They are giving them wrong notion of religion and exploiting even  religious  symbols to gain votes.  But people  should  know what  is  the “true religion” and abide by it.  When  we  witness rampant  political  immoral gimmicks and scams,  we  cannot  shun religion from politics. Only religion can purify politics, which has  become a dirty game in India–a mockery of Democracy…

HEALTH AND WELL-BEING:

Different Medical Systems:

Well-Being and Happiness:

POEMS:

GOEANK BHETTOIL’LI KOVITA MHOJI

Dp: Goem mojem mannkulem,

Devagelem vhodd  dennem,

Goem tum omolik mhojem,

Sobhit-sundor-daizachem.
             

1) Doria, nodi, rukh-zhaddam,

Dongor, narlam-madd, ranam,

Suriachim zhogzhogit kirnnam,

Ditat sobhitai amchea Goeam.

2)Amchi bhas amkam ektthaita,

Tambddi zomin bhiradd dita,

Sonvskrutai amkam grestaita,

Amchem poriovronn sambhallta.

3)Sobhit-sundor Goem amchem,

Tem amim zagrutaen rakhchem,

Bhas, osmitai, daiz amchem

Duddvam-axen tem na vikhchem.

4)Sobhit-sundor vello,

Rakhpak asat jhilkutam,

Zhaddam-pedd, doriaxim

Varea-lharancher surokxim.

  CURRENT AFFAIRS:

     We shall give from time to time relevant news and views.

                                                         QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS:

You are welcome to ask me questions that bother you.I shall give a few questions and answers.

 What is the meaning of the term “Covenant”?

   Covenant (from latin cum+venire=’to come together’) means “disposition, agreement, pact, alliance’. In Hebrew it is berith and in Greek diatheke.  God is love (cf.1 Jn 4:8). He comes out of his silent, inner, Trinitarian life and sets out for a crea­tive adventure of love. His salvific plan is the outcome of his effusive love.  Out of his initiative of love God created MAN (that is, humankind), with whom there was communion. But due to the abuse and misuse of his freedom, Man refuses God’s love. In the process of saving Man from sin and its consequences, the historical God reveals himself as compassionate, merciful love. The God of the Bible is YAHWEH, the source of being and love. His ultimate aim was to give his only Son, the Word (cf. Jn 1:14; 3:16). God’s salvific design for humankind is recorded in the Bible. His Revelation is historical.  It is expressed in words and works/deeds (cf. DV 2). His self-communication is described in the Bible in terms of a covenant (Hb berith–Gk, diatheke), from which a permanent rela­tionship between Yahweh and humankind results.  He is God of covenant, of promises, who intervened in the history of human­kind. Covenant is a relational concept: God writes a love-letter to humankind.

  Raimon Pannikar, using the comparison of the rainbow shows how the white Divine light falling on the prism of human experience diffracts into innumerable doctrines and religions.[1] This imagery given by Raimon Pannikar tries to bring home the message of ‘tat tvam asi’ in an analogical sense. It is the same white light, which appears into unique different colours. So too, the source and the ground of all beings is He, the Brahman. All human beings have their groundedness in Brahman (realityfying reality). We are all unique, yet our be-ing is in the Supreme Being. Speaking in the biblical terminology, God created us in His image and likeness.[2] It is only because we are gifted with the divine nature, that we are able to build a communion of mind and heart with other persons. The divine presence becomes a suitable platform for dialogue. Social liberation also gets an impetus to fight against racism, casteism, untouchability, marginalisation of dalits, tribals and women and all other forms of social discrimination as well as religious fundamentalism. Basically, the goal of Indian philosophy is self-realization (moksa). The search for self-realization is not a movement outward but inward to the deepest center of the human person, where the Brahman is hidden. This process of Brahmanubhava is possible because the human person has the capacity for the simple intuition of him/herself.  In the following few pages, we attempt at a satisfactory analysis of the Mahavakya ‘tat tvam asi’ by which one realizes one’s own real nature.

Śankaracāryā[3] is a great genius of India. Pandit J. Nehru in his ‘Discovery of India’ describes the powerful mind and the rich personality of Śankara as “a curious mixture of philosopher and scholar, agnostic and mystic, poet and saint, practical reformer and an able organizer.[4] Not only Śankara But each philosopher understood and interpreted the Vedanta[5] differently. The word Advaita is very controversial in its interpretation and translation, although most sankarite scholars consider him to be a non-dualist but an equal number term him to be a monist.[6] Śankara’s Vedanta is called as “Kevala Advaita Vedanta”.[7] The following four premises may bring home the message more clearly, yet to grasp it in its totality is beyond our capacity. Brahman is truly real. The world is false (The pluralistic world is the appearance of Brahman, it has no reality of its own from the absolute point of view). The self is Brahman. Only non-duality.[8] The three levels of reality according to Śankara are: 1. Pratibhasika level (illusory experience) e.g. Rope/snake 2. Vyavaharika level(phenomenal experience). The world of multiplicity is only relatively real 3.Paramarthika level (transcendental experience). It consists in viewing the world of multiplicity from the supreme point of view in which everything is united.[9]

The four Mahavakyas[10] play a very significant role in the realization that the self (Atman) is Brahman. It was the truth that Uddalaka Arun imparted by way of instruction to his son Svetaketu in the Chandogya Upanishad VI, 8,6 ssq, when he said, “Thou art That”(tat tvam asi”).[11]

Upadeesa vaakya (The statement of advice)—Tat tvam asi

The central teaching of the Upanishads, the essence of the vedanta, the goal of all wisdom and all spiritual practices, the reality of all realities, the quintessence of truth is that the individual self, the embodied soul, the jiva is identical with the supreme, the absolute, the Brahman. To realize that the Atman is Brahman, the guru imparts instructions to the śisya. The formulae are mystical and cannot be lightly understood. They are imparted only to the picked disciples at the end of their Vedic training (Vedanta (=veda+anta). the guru[12] advises the śisya to recognize his Atman as identical with the Brahman. Every seeker of knowledge of Brahman must sit at the feet of a proper and competent guru. The instruction, study and understanding of the meaning of the Mahavakyas take place in three stages:[13]

(1) Hearing (Sravana)(2) Reflection (Manana)(3) Meditation (Nidh’djhyaasana).

Sravana is the mental activity, which helps the understanding of the Upanisadic text, that the self is Brahman. In the Sravana stage, the student ascertains and establishes the true import of the scripture text. The purpose of manana is to fortify one’s own convictions of the truth, to get rid of all the doubts and to make one comprehend the real meaning of the mahavakya by consistently interpreting it, so that the apparent inconsistencies are resolved. The final stage, meditation (Nidh’djhyaasana), leads to the complete removal of the ignorance, thus leading to the direct realization of the self as Brahman. If the śisya is successful in his reflection and intellectually convinced of his identity with Brahman, then he is ready to strive for the direct realization. It is in this stage that the guru says to the śisya; “Tat Tvam Asi”.

Meaning 

Tat Tvam Asi. (That Thou Art). This famous text emphasizes the divine nature of the human soul, the need to discriminate between the essential self and the accidental self with which it is confused.  He who knows only what is of the body or mind knows the things that may be his but not himself. The text “That Thou Art” applies to the inward person, antah purusa, and not to the empirical soul. (What I am, that is he, what he is, that am I.)[14] Let us now try to examine the meaning of the mahavakya ‘Tat Tvam Asi’. Tat (that) in its primary meaning refers to Iisvera, the personal God, who is the creator, preserver and the destroyer of the universe. This Saguna Brahman is endowed with qualities of omnipotence and omniscience. The term Tvam (thou) directly refers to the willing hearer of the scripture as taught by the guru. Thus, Thou refer to jiva, the individual ego. The jiva is conditioned by the three fold miseries, the misery of the body and mind, the misery arising from perishable creatures, and the misery arising from the action of gods .the jiva is limited by birth and death, hunger and thirst, pain and pleasure. The jiva has three states of existence –waking, dreaming, and deep sleeping. The term asi (art) states a complete identity of ‘that’ and ‘thou’. Thus, in the direct meaning ‘Tat Tvam asi’ points to the identity between Iisvera and the jiva. But such an identity is not possible in the full literal sense. Since Iisvera and jiva are separate from each other, the former is the powerful and the supreme lord, while the latter is the limited worshipper of Iisvera. Therefore an absolute identity between them seems to be impossible.

The scriptural statement ‘tat tvam asi’ cannot be interpreted in this meaning, because such an interpretation would falsify the scriptural statement therefore it has to be interpreted in the meaning other than this meaning. “So what is inconsistent in the connotations of the two terms is to be rejected and what is consistent is alone to be retained”.[15] It should not be interpreted in the first sense because, “If God becomes identical with the transmigrating soul, God will cease to exist, and as a result, the scripture will become useless. Similarly if the transmigrating soul becomes God, there will be none to follow the scripture, which will certainly become useless. This will also contradict such means of proof as common experience”[16]. The implied meaning of the word ‘tat’ refers to the universal self (Brahman). This Universal Being is the efficient and the material cause of the universe. Everything originates in Brahman, finds its existence in it, nothing can limit it. Just as a jar that originates from the earth cannot limit the earth, in the same way the whole universe cannot limit it. Just as a jar is nothing but the earth, so also the universe is nothing but Brahman, The word Tvam in the implied sense points to the inner self, the Atman. We comprehend the meaning of tvam only when we negate the body, senses, mind, vital forces, and the ego. Just as the reality of the rope is known only when the snake is negated from the rope. When this negation is done, we come to know that the ‘thou’ is Atman, which is free from the phenomenal existence. Thus the implied meaning of ‘that’ is the Nirguna Brahman, the pure consciousness, who is the absolute and without attributes. ‘Thou’ by implication refers to the self (Atman) which is the reality underlying the mind-body system. Hence, the statement, ‘tat tvam asi’ means, Brahman and Atman are one and absolutely the same.

Illustration:

In the mahavakya ‘that art thou’ there is an identity which establishes a genuine relationship between the two terms. Let us try to understand this with an illustration. This Brother John is that boy from Dabal. The words ‘this’ and ‘that’, by elimination of contrary association of past and present time stand in the relation as the implier and the implied with John, who is common to both. Though the words this and that have their temporal differences, imply the same person, John. The relationship between thatness and thisness involves a reference to the identity. The contradictions namely his life in the past and the present are given up, but the person of John is retained. Likewise, in the mahavakya ‘that thou art’, the conflicting meaning, namely, immediateness, remoteness and differences are given up and the absolute pure consciousness, which is common to both, is retained. “We arrive at this unity by stripping away the incompatible and contradictory elements of the terms ‘that’ and ‘thou’and by looking for the common elements or basis”.[17] In the illustration, the John seen now is identified with the John seen years ago, despite all the accidental differences like physical conditions, mental states and places of meeting. What makes one identify the person of John, as the same is the elimination of differences, In the same way the negation of the apparent contradiction of that and thou would lead to the fundamental and absolute reality as one. In fact, in recognizing the person of John now one has learned nothing new about the person of John expect the accidental qualities. In the same way the statement, do not reveal anything new about or add anything new about Brahman. When ignorance, on which is based the difference is removed, they cease to be different and we are able to experience their identity. Thus the identity statement ‘that thou art’ shows that Brahmananubhava or self-realization is a non-dual and unique experience of Brahman and Atman which is the absolute and fundamental reality behind everything.[18]

CRITIQUE  

Some have attempted to propound interpretations and critiques in-terms of non-Indian traditions. Almost all questions raised to Śankara can be answered based on the three levels.

Negative Appraisal

1) In Śankara’s non-dualism, there is dualism inherent. The knowledge of the phenomenal reality is

Characterized by subject-object duality[19]. The transcendental state is characterized as non-dual. There is a diametrically opposite fundamental difference between the phenomenal and transcendental knowledge. One who is in empirical existence does not possess the transcendental knowledge (Is the Sisya real to the guru?) and to the jiivanmukta who has attained the transcendental state of existence, the empirical knowledge becomes unreal (how does he know then to act?). Such an epistemological position amounts to dualism because it presupposes two unrelated levels of knowing.

2) There is the difficulty of genuine communication between persons who belong to the phenomenal and transcendental levels of existence. The phenomenal knowledge is unreal to the self-realized person, so Brahmaanbhava cannot be communicated by the brahmajnanni (guru) to any one in the realm of phenomenal existence. So, Brahman-experience cannot be passed on to others in any form of communication, any attempt to communicate it using phenomenal language would be a mere phenomenal explanation of the transcendental level. Is there not incommunicability between the two levels?

3) The Sankarite path to self-realization is basically by the aspirant alone. It is not an I-Thou relationship, in which one enters into the life of the other as an equal partner. Other than the guru, the śisya does not have any significant relationship with any other person. This is very much clear from what the aspirant does in the three stages. The various stages are so centered on the individual seeker and his personal effort that the presence of the other in the process is seen as an interference that would distract him from the goal. Even after the seeker has attained self-realization, he doesn’t need to have any relationship with the other or with the community because all such relationships would be irrelevant and unreal to him. Thus, it appears that Śankara does not give any significance to the I-Thou relationship that is a genuine and neglects the inter-subjective communion of hearts between human persons that is essential for one’s living.

4) The śisya ought to be a person of healthy body, strong will, keen mind, and a sharp intellect. If these qualities were expected of the aspirant then even before they begin the process, a great number of people in the world would never be able to begin the process itself. It is impractical, in the sense that a majority would not be able to use it. It aims at helping only the intellectual and the wise to attain self-realization (moksa), leaving out the majority of the people.

5) Liberation implies freedom from the cycle of birth and rebirth. The liberated person continues to live in the bodily state (jivanmukta) but it is the result of the accumulated past karmas. Thus, Śankara does not give rightful place to the body.

6) It appears that the supreme intuition (anubhava) is an achievement well within the natural powers of humans rather than as a pure self-gift of God. Does Śankara negate the Divine hand and His grace?

7) A feminist will certainly ask whether the Brahmananubhava is open only to the male child and why not to the female?

As to when do the atman identifies with the body? What causes the atman to fall in the lower level?  How does atman gets entangled into the cycle of birth and rebirth for the first time?

9) But is it not absurd to declare that the very sources of valid knowledge, including the Śruti [20]function in dependence on the very opposite of valid knowledge, avidya?

POSITIVE APPRAISAL

Self-realization is self-transcendence.  When we know what we are, then we become what we should be.

1) The phenomenal world is relatively real.  It is not acosmic but meta-cosmic. From this world (level) to beyond this world (level), yet rooted in this world. “Even if it is transformed for the liberated soul, the world continues to exists for the unliberated soul”[21] It is real for the Jivanmukta.

The empirical world is real from the Vyavaharika point of view but from the paramarthika point of view the phenomenal world is unreal. As Śankara clearly pointed out that, the world is real because we can never contradict or question the existence of the reality of the world as long as we are part of the phenomena. But when one attains the absolute oneness with Brahman all duality is eliminated thus from the paramarthika level the phenomenal world is unreal.

2) Many consider advaita Vedanta to be pantheistic because it consists in the identity of the self and Brahman. The theory of causality accepted by Śankara is not Brahmaarambavada but vivartavada. It is a mystical philosophy that aims at making everyone aware of his /her ontological nature that s/he is Brahman and of moving towards attaining it. Pantheism implies the identity of unity and multiplicity; unity-in-distinction (non-dual) makes pantheism an impossibility.[22]

3) Brahman is not a deity to be worshipped but is the absolute ontological reality behind all the phenomena. “The relationship between the person and the object worshipped implies a difference between the two”.[23] Hence, some claim that it is against religion and the worship of true God. But religion and worship of God are not ends in themselves but means to the ultimate realization of the self as Brahman. Brahman is not a deity to be worshipped but to be realized.

4) Is Śankara’s philosophy non-ethical? Rather it is a system of values that calls the sysya to move from the lower to the higher level. Finally, to the highest state of Brahman-experience.

5) Śankara’s approach to reality appears to be negative/pessimistic but he points to the spiritual nature of the universe and individual. He makes the distinction between what is of relative value and what of permanent value.

6) Brahman is nirguna, which should be translated as ‘impersonal’. Hence, there is no real possibility of establishing any interpersonal relationship with Him.[24] If Brahman is said to be the nirguna (beyond all definitions) than how can he be known at all?

7) It is not becoming but discovering. It is only the recognition/realization of what we are already. The aim is to become what we are. The goal of Indian philosophy is the attainment of liberation. )   Śankara’s philosophy is not acosmistic that is escaping from the world.(fuga mundi).But his philosophy may demand  attaching oneself to God by detaching oneself from the non-god.

THE EVENT OF APPROPRIATION:

We intentionally insert this section here after the critique to show the beautiful western interpretation of Martin Heidegger.“Tat tvam asi” means that both Being and man (?) hold each other in the belonging-together (to come to where one belongs). Though man is an entity in the totality of beings, man is distinct as a thinker of Being and a dweller in the nearness of Being. He is open to Being and stands face to face with Being. In this orientation and openness towards Being, man listens and responds to Being. Not only does man belong to Being, but also Being belongs to man, it presences itself to man and abides in him by making a claim on him. Thus, Being draws man to it, appropriates him and finds in him a place for its presencing. This appropriation of Being and man involves a mutual gifting of man to Being and Being to man, this mutual              belonging together is a dedicating of man and Being to each other.  This fundamental relationship of Being and man is the basis of all other relationships.[25]

Conclusion:

Religion, whose aim is to take people to their ultimate destiny and to experience the divine, often forgets this responsibility, so wars are fought in the name of religion. Since the human person has forgotten that, s/he is one with other persons, there is discord within human society. But a philosophy of life that attempts to flower all that is genuine and authentic in a person by taking him/her to the depth of his/her being is highly appreciative. The call to oneness and unity within oneself, with others and finally with the whole universe in the absolute Brahman is the message of Śankara’s Advaita. It is simply “faith seeking understanding” that is blissful intuition in which Vedanta places moksa. When I realize my principle unity and identity with the divine then consequently if follows that it is my responsibility to cherish and to love all beings since all are one in Brahman.[26] This dictum gives the metaphysics and morals together “Love your neighbour as yourself”. You shall love your neighbour as yourself because you are your neighbour and mere illusion makes you believe that your neighbour is somebody different from yourself. Therefore, one will not injure him/herself by him/herself. Thus, the apostolic letter of our Holy Father calls us to take the other as ‘those who are part of me’ as  ‘gifts for me’ and ‘to make room for the other in me’.[27] It makes man realize that divinity is not something that one searches outside but that in himself is the Divine.  It proclaims not the divinity of man but his nothingness. Since we are in the vyavarikha level we can rightly say that this too will pass away. 

FESTIVAL OF DIVALI

It is the dream of humanity to be in the light and walk according to the light. I am happy when my Hindu brethren celebrate the festival of Diwali (popular modification of the Sanskrit word Deepavali, which means a “row or cluster of lights”), the Festival of Lights, fireworks and colours, rejoicing and fellowship. It symbolizes the victory of good over the evil. This is the theme of the festival: It is symbolized by the burning of Narakasur, the demon of darkness.

The festival takes place from the 13^th of the dark half of Ashwin (September-October) to the 2^nd of the bright half of Kartika. Its origin is the incident (or legend) of Yamraja, the King of death. It is celebrated for one, two, three or four days. But most devotees believe that this festival is to be celebrated for five days: from the 13^th of the dark half of Ashwin to the 2^nd of the bright half of Kartika. Though all five days are often called Divali, they in fact constitute a complex of five different festivals.

The Origin of the Festival: There is a legend that Yamraja, the King of death, asked his servant: “Do you feel any time bad when you snatch men’s life?” “Yes”, replied the servant, “when I took the son of king Haim. It was just four days after his marriage, while joy and merry-making was all around I had to take away his life.” Yamaraja felt bad about it and from then onwards decided saying: “Today is the 13^th of the dark half of Ashwin Dhantra-yodashi. From today all those who will observe the five-day festival of light will not die an untimely death.” Thus came the custom of lighting the lamp for five days, with special rituals. The festival came to be known as the festival of light, Divali or Deepavali (“row of lights”).

            The Festival Rituals: There are five principal items (or elements) that constitute the      Divali festival: worship of wealth, celebration of Vishnu’s victory over Narakasura, worship of Lakshmi and dice-play, celebration of the victory of Vishnu over Bali, and the exchange of brotherly and sisterly affection. Illuminations and fireworks characterize all the days of Divali. However, in addition, each of the five days has some cultic features particular to it. 

There are five celebrations: i) First celebration is on the 13^th day. It is called Yama-trayodasi (Yama’s 13^th day): worshipping Yamaraja, the King of death. It is characterized by cleaning of courtyards, painting of the house and washing of vessels. The day begins with a ritual bath and a pledge taken by the devotee to partake of saltless food and to sleep on the floor. These acts are symbolic of one’s desire to mortify oneself and to make a new beginning in one’s relationships with God and neighbour through inner cleansing. This day is spent in special devotion to Krishna. In the evening a lamp is lit and offered to Yama with a prayer that the devotee be preserved from sudden and untimely death. People on this day also worship coins and ornaments and purchase new utensils. Hence this day is also called Dhana-trayodasi or Dhana-teras (See Kane, Pandurang Vaman, History of Dharmasastra, Poona (Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute), 1974, vol.V, Part I, p. 194).

ii) The second day is known as Naraka-Chaturdasi (Naraka’s 14^th day), commemorating Krishna’s victory over the demon Naraka. It falls on the 14^th of the dark half of Ashwin and it is known as Narak-Chaturdashi (from Narak, meaning “hell”, and Chaturdashi, meaning “the 14^th day”). The 13^th of the dark half of Ashwin is observed to procure for oneself protection against sudden and untimely death, whereas the 14^th has for its principal objective deliverance from sickness and sin, as it is indicated by several ritual gestures and words used on this day: the oil-bath in the morning, the waving of the apotropaic medicinal plant apamarga during the bath, the libation of water to Yama, the lighting of a ceremonial lamp to keep Naraka away, the lighting of many lamps in several places in and around one’s house, the crushing underfoot of a bitter cucumber, symbolizing Naraka, and the many prayers offered for deliverance from personal sins or those of one’s deceased ancestors. A solemn memorial of one’s departed relatives is made in and through the parvana-shraddha, and a meal is given to Brahmins (Cf.PVKane, op.cit., pp.196-198; Subhash Anand, Major Hindu Festivals—A Christian Appreciation, Bombay (St.Paul’s Publications), 1991, pp.106-108).

Narakasur was a wicked king, a symbol of Satan. He had imprisoned around 16,000 (or 50,100) women, snatched away the ‘chatra’ of Indra, “Kundale” from the ears of Aditiy, the mother of the gods. When Krishna heard about the wicked deeds of Narakasur, he decided to destroy him. But it was Satyabhama, Krishna’s wife who took the challenge of killing Narakasur. She killed Narakasur and liberated all women and, when they returned home, they expressed their joy by lighting lamp and drawing “Rangoli”. In remembrance of this event, even to this day, people early in the morning take bath and draw “Rangoli” to mark the celebration.

iii) Third Day: It is Divali proper, also called Lakshmi-Puja (or Kali Puja). This day, as the title itself indicates, is one specially dedicated to the worship of Lakshmi, the goddess of wealth. It is a day given to merry-making with dancing and music, and is known as Sukha-ratri. Devotees prepare for this day by worshipping their account-books, closing old accounts and opening new one. Houses and their surroundings are brilliantly illuminated with rows upon rows of lamps, and people dressed in all their finery go around joyously greeting relatives, friends and neighbours, while exchanging gifts. The womenfolk make arati to their family members to implore God’s blessings on them, and beat winnowing baskets and drums to symbolically dispel evil and misfortune from their midst. On this day, cows are specially honoured in the govardhana-puja, as an expression of gratitude to God for the prosperity that has come to their farming communities through them. They are tastefully decorated with coloured designs, festoons and garlands, and are not milked on this day nor made to bear any burden. At night, people gather to read edifying passages from their sacred books, to sing songs to Vishnu, and to pass their time gambling, one way of acquiring wealth! ()

It is on the moon light “Amavasya” of the Ashwin Lakhsmi that the goddess of wealth was taken as a slave by King Bali. Vishnu, in his fifth Avatara as Vaman, defeated Bali and freed Lakhsmi. It is a day special to the shopkeepers and merchants. They close their old accounts and open new one. Cows are specially honoured and a “Govardhana-puja” is done in thanksgiving for the prosperity bestowed by God. New clothes are bought, crackers and other fire-works’ display surrounds the houses. It is a day for rejoicing and entertainment.

iv) Fourth celebration is called Bali-pratipada. The first of the bright half of Kartika is regarded as one of the three most auspicious days of the year. The most important event of this day is the worship given to Bali, a good and popular King, of a past golden age in India, who became the important personage in a myth that is the original nucleus of the festival of Divali .

After an oil-bath, a picture of Bali and his wife Vindhyavali is drawn in five colours on the floor of the house, puja is offered in which, besides the usual gifts, kukuda (lotus) flowers and also meat and alcohol are presented, accompanied by appropriate prayers. In the afternoon, a proclamation is made: “Today is the rule of Bali, enjoy yourself!” Devotees make it a point to offer alms on this day, as such an act of mercy is believed to be specially meritorious. The night is spent in prayerful vigil and in edifying people through sacred dramas.

v) The final celebration is called Yama-dvitiya (Yama’s second day)/Bhaiya-doo/Bhai-beej: This day, the last of the Divali festival, commemorates the meal that Yama had at the house of his sister Yami (or Yamuna). On this day all men should go to their sisters’ houses (or, in case he has no sister, to the house of a close female relative), where the sister serves him a meal with great affection, while the brother reciprocates by offering her ornaments and gifts. Before the meal, a ritual bath is prescribed, as well as libations of water offered for the departed, for their deliverance from the bondage of their sins.  With these expressions of love and concern for both the living and the dead, the festival comes to a close (cf.Gregory Naik, SJ, ed., Understanding Our Fellow Pilgrims, Gujarat Sahitya Prakash, Baroda, 2000, pp.126-131).

Its Significance: There are three elements to understand the meaning of Divali, namely the myth regarding Bali, the five-day celebration which begins and ends with the commemoration of Yama, and Diwali as a festival of lights.

The myth of Bali is central to the celebration of Divali. According to this myth, Bali, who had become very powerful, had incurred the displeasure of the gods. One day, as he was offering an ashvamedha sacrifice, Vishnu appeared to him in the avatar of a dwarf Brahmin student, Vamana, and begged him for as much land as he could cover in three paces. Bali, notwithstanding a warning from his teacher that the request was an insidious one, generously acceded to it. Thereupon, Vamana grew larger and larger and in two steps covered heaven and earth. When Vamana asked Bali where he could place his foot for his third step, Bali told him to plant it on his head. Vamana at once did so and thrust Bali into the netherworld! However, Vishnu was so pleased with Bali’s adherence to his pledged word that he raised him to the status of Indra.

Divali is rightly the festival of lights. It firmly emphasized where true wisdom and values lie. Light symbolizes wisdom, truth, certitude, joy, and life. He, therefore, who always strives to live a life of godliness is the one who is eminently qualified to truly and rightly celebrate this great festival (maha-utsava) of Divali. Furthermore, one who strives to experience God in everyone and everything rejoices in the brotherliness and sisterliness that bind not only human beings here on earth but also those ho have passed over to a better life, not only cows, animals, and other mute creatures, but also inanimate creation.

The five-day celebration of Divali is, therefore, meaningful for all of us. We grope in darkness for light and happiness. God is Light. Only God can remove darkness and vices, and usher in a day of brightness, joy and happiness. For us, Christians, Jesus of Nazareth is the “Light of the World” (cf.Jn 8:12). We share in his divine light and life, and try to communicate it to others through our service and communion. There are women who are victims of so many evils, injustice, oppression and pain. Who will come to their rescue? Can we be voice to the voiceless? What is our prophetic role in being at their service, at the service of love and brotherhood?

            Though Bhaibeej seems to limit to the blood relations or close relatives; Christian love, however, has been expanded even to those who persecute you. “Love your enemy and pray for those who persecute you” (Mt. 5:44).

Our greetings to our Hindu brethren on the festival of light. It is interesting to visit our Hindu friends during the festival, since we can taste delicious sweets, like halwa, burfi and laddu. We need a national day of celebration which may unite us. We have to be united in fighting against corruption and injustice. We should be at the service of truth and love. I wish you all a happy Divali!

Introduction:

In the last three decades, there has been a tremendous mushrooming of movements in the world and in the Church. The Charismatic Movement brought its ‘enthusiasm’ (‘divine fire’) and warmth, a deeper love for the Word of God and for prayer. People had to witness a new way of loving and proclaiming the Christian faith, and modify or abandon the conventional ways of thinking and doing things. They experienced more spontaneity and warmth, which had a deep impact on their lives. But some of them may have gone to the extreme, thinking that only they were “baptized in the Spirit”, that they had the monopoly of God’s Spirit, that they are “the Church”, that they are privileged people because they “speak in tongues”, that they are holier than the others (‘holier-than-thou-attitude’), who are regarded as “second-rate Christians”. Then there arose the Neo-Catechumenal Way, with the same feeling that they are “the Church”, that they have the genuine way of worshipping, that they show more enthusiasm in the worship and proclamation of faith, that their liturgy is livelier and has a better flavour and glamour. Recently, we have been hearing of the mass deaths (including suicides) of sect members in Texas, Guyana and Switzerland. Other sects, especially in Latin America, bring people into a dream world, cut off from reality. These sects are also sprouting in India. Still others, based on the cult of Satan, appear particu¬larly evil. There is today the phenomenon of sects, the so-called “believers”. It is the spirit-pheonomenon, Neo-Pentecostalism, as presented by the sectarian groups. It has its “package of emo¬tional satisfactions for the common folk”. It is a kind of “spiritual narcissism”. It gives a fundamentalist interpretation of the Bible and tries to criticise the Church in every way for the sake of ‘sheep-stealing’. It is too emotional and fundamen¬talist. It does not show concern for the socio-economic situa¬tion. It enslaves rather than liberate them. The “healing ses¬sions” are a kind of opium for the people, rather than prophetic enhancers. The “born-again” slogan is rather an emotional gimmick of ‘holier-than-thou’ attitude. Ecstatic forms of spiritu¬ality, with ‘gifts of tongue and healings’, are an outlet for the difficult situations of oppression and psychological stress. These movements sprout easily in this kind of environment. With this elitist attitude and self-righteous pride, the members of these movements have become a factor of division, instead of cementing unity. Revivalism has led to fundamentalism and fanaticism. This destructive criticism is a factor and sign of deviation. Golden Criterion: A Christian movement will sprout and grow properly within the local cultural context only when it is in communion with the local Bishop and the local Church, granting that there is proper discernment in the Spirit on the part of the local authorities and members. If these movements remain hermetically closed and aloof from other members of the Church, they may recruit most of the dis¬gruntled elements. This is precisely the “problem” of the new phenomenon of sects and cults. They have the “black or white attitude”, they are “all or nothing”, they are not able to share their gifts of joy and life to the members of the Church. We should not forget that amidst all the vicissitudes of the modern life, God is present with us. “I am with you” should be in our minds. It is God who guides us with his light and life. Therefore, we require an existential, humble, open, sincere, trusting, loving attitude. We can apply a golden criterion to know whether these movements are genuine or not by remembering the Lord’s saying: “You will know them by their fruits” (Mt 7:20) (cf.”Each tree is known by its own fruit”: Lk 6:44; Mt 12:33). If a movement or institu¬tion comes from God, it will remain alive; otherwise, it will destroy itself (cf.Gamaliel’s statement in Ac 5:38f: “If this undertaking comes from men, it will fail; but if it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them. You might even be found to fight against God [theomakhoi]). Difference between a Sect and a Community: We have to bear in mind the distinction between a sect and a community. What is a sect and what are its characteristics? A sect is defined or at least described by the following characteristics: i)A wise, all-powerful Guru dominates the mem¬bers. He is considered as the uniquely inspired prophet and saviour. Only his teaching is true. Other authorities are not tolerated. Sometimes even other thought patterns or life styles are strictly forbidden. ii) The sect is considered as the harbinger of a new salvific message to be spread throughout the world. It motivates the members for large recruitment. iii)According to the sectarian mentality, the world is divided into saved and damned. They are specialists in the “black-or-white attitude”. Due to fear syndrome, the members accept everything blindly, without further questions or resist¬ance. They are not encouraged to have relations with friends or relatives. It is a process of slow, gradual brainwashing. v) They are fed with feelings of worthlessness and meaning¬lessness. They remain without a safe direction, so that if they decide to leave the group, anguish, emptiness and loneliness overwhelm them. Some of these elements can be found in a Christian communi¬ty, but there is a growth in maturity. ´ a) In the Christian community, each person has value and dignity. The person is encouraged to grow in freedom, responsibility and maturity. More im¬portant than the numerical growth or institutional survival, the vocation of each member is a vital issue, so that the candidate is given time for probation and self-examination. b) The Christian community is not a closed group. It grows in contact with other members and outsiders. In times of conflict solutions can be found through dialogue. Whether a community/movement grows in the path of the Spirit or not can be judged through a few signs. The community deepens its charism and at the same time discovers the beauty of other movements, always in dialogue/communion with the local bishop. It recognizes that it is a part of the Church, not the whole Church. It needs some time for its insertion/inculturation in the fabric of the local Church. It should cooperate with the local bishop and with other movements or communities. b) If the Spirit is active in the movement and the members are attentive to the Spirit, they should realise their shortcomings and mistakes. They may misinterpret the vision of the Found¬er or distort the way of life. They should examine whether the power has been used or abused. They should be open to criticism and self-questioning, and be honest in correcting or changing certain aspects, which were necessary at the initial stage of their movement, but have become outmoded/obsolete, even a sign of death. c) A Christian movement has to evolve continually in the Spirit, remain faithful to the Church, without losing its identi¬ty. It has to continue its openness and preserve its identity. While working for unity of the Churches and dialogue with other religions, the Supreme Pontiff John Paul II follows carefully the two guidelines, firm identity and sincere openness. If a new movement is announcing Good News to the poor and allowing them to evangelise it in return, then here again is a sign of the Spirit. To eat at the same table as the poor, to be committed to them in bonds of friendship, is, humanly speaking, repugnant, demanding and disturbing. The presence of the poor and the weak prevents it from closing it upon itself. The poor oblige it to evolve and to deepen. If the disciples of Jesus are to proclaim successfully the Good News to the poor and downtrodden, they have to get down to their platform–follow their style–, in order to bring them up to a better human dignity (folk 6:20-23; Mt 5:3-12). God has promised us to be “with us”, our Immanuel, “God-with-us” (Mt 1:23; 28:20), with tender loving care for each one of us. d) The community should give witness to the love of the weaker members, in situations of conflict, doubt or psychological distress. The community should not try to destroy the person. e) The community should radiate joy, which has its source in the Risen Lord, being conscious that Jesus guides the Church towards growth, whereas the members are just instruments of love. The Church has to be continually pruned and purified so as to remain faithful to the Spirit. The reason why some of the members leave the Church and join the sectarian groups, called “believers”, seems to be as follows: They find more warmth, freedom and the sense of belonging and fellowship. Quite often, they escape from all rules and regula¬tions. They are pleased with their new structures. Satanic Cults: Prof.Eugenio Fizzoti, teaching Psychology at the Pontifical Salesian University, Rome, refers to a psychologic behaviour, which is often attributed to demonic forces (people think imme¬diately of demonic possession) (Eugenio FIZZOTI, “Sects and Satanic Cults-3″, in: L’Osservatore Romano, n.7, February 12, 1997, p.10). We have to admit here the reality of Satan, which can “manifest itself in forms which are often extravagant, unfor¬eseeable and disturbing”, as well as the “multiplicity of human behaviour which cannot always be deciphered with the normal interpretive categories”. We find it difficult to interpret some of the phenomena, which we saw or heard. Merely denying the facts smacks of unsci¬entific attitude or pedantry. For example, there are physical disturbances; local “hauntings”/infestations of houses, objects, or animals; obsession and personal impulses up to the point of attempting suicide; vexations which cause loss of consciousness and lead to deplorable actions of muscle twitching or to pronounc¬ing phrases of hatred towards God, the sacred persons or cruci¬fix. Psychological or Demonic?: These are some of the expressions which raise the question as to whether the person is possessed/oppressed by Satan or suffers instead from psychological dissociation or hysteria. Frequently, behaviour attributed to demonic influence can be interpreted, without any shadow of doubt, as situations with a pathological background. There is also the phenomenon of “polter¬geist”, whereby some persons can influence the environment, like magnetic glance. The clothes are burnt, the chairs are over¬thrown, and the doors are open, without any other explanation. Other cases, however, present a clear antithesis to God’s saving plan. Therefore, the sole use of psychological/psychiatric tools fails to provide a sufficient and convincing explanation of these phenomena. It is difficult to identify the border between psychotic situations and true demonic influence. Moreover, the information often suffers manipulation and distortion. Thus, it does not do justice to the phenomena in their totality and complexity. For this reason, what is really only the expression of profound psychological disturbances too often is turned into a diabolical possession. Frequently, the membership statistics of Satanic groups are swollen to create a sort of reverential fear or a “witch hunt”. Criteria: Pio Scilligo, Professor of Psychology at the Salesian University, in Rome, remarks that each one of us experi¬ences our own talking to ourselves. These are “signs of small doubling of the personality, more visible when the ‘you’ form is used, and less evident when one uses the ‘I” form”. After having finished a job, for example, we say: “Well done, you did that just right!”, or, after having done something inappropriate , we say:: “I’m a fool; I must go right away and apologize!”. Experi¬ences of this type can be explained without necessarily having recourse to “talking spirits”. It is sufficient to speak of relatively autonomous “thought patterns”, “introjections” or “ego states” which the normal person can make use of, because such automatisms represent little “demons”, good or evil, which each of us carries within the complex structure of his own psychology. According to Scilligo, however, there exist much tougher defence mechanisms created by the person, stemming from traumatic experiences or from relational behaviours, prolonged over time and assimilated from the outside with distorted interpretations of reality, which produce behavioural islands which seem to be alter egos. In such cases, it can happen that some manifestations (such as the expression of anger, speaking in tongues, grasping in a surprising way the internal experience of the exorcist), can find a natural explanation in the psychic processes of withdrawal and projection, technically defined as borderline behaviour, or at the edge of normality. At the same time, it is possible that sometimes we find ourselves faced with manifestations that elude the metaphorical explanations of a psychological/psychiatric nature, and cannot be explained on the basis of what is known in the scientific world. In this case, it would make sense to have recourse to the hypothesis of “forces external to the subject”, which exert a destructive influence on him. The correct distinction between pathological behaviour of a psychic nature and demonic invasion/possession has not been yet clearly established by science. Professor E.Fizzoti states: “It is my absolute conviction, contrary to what is bandied about, that only in two or three cases out of a thousand are we faced with true diabolical possession. In this perspective, clearly, only a serious scientist with an open mind, able to transcend his limited field of expertise, can recognize the possibility of diabolical possession”. It is more difficult to analyse the behavioral motivation of those who declare themselves in favour of Satanism and express their convictions in criminal behaviour, frequently with legal consequences (for example, by desecrating graves, by performing macabre rituals with the killing of animals, by committing rape of more or less consenting virgins, and by procedures causing loss of self-control in psychologically vulnerable subjects). In this case, we could have recourse, as interpretive cri¬teria, to a few concepts developed by the psychologist Erich FROMM. Investigating the human relationship to various types of religion, Fromm shows that some people manifest towards the divinity an attitude of absolute dependence, of blind and irrational obedience and passive acceptance of any norm. As a re¬sult, they think of themselves as inept, wretched creatures, capable of acquiring a certain strength only to the extent that a supreme and unchallenged power reaches out to them. Such an authoritarian, inhuman vision of one’s relationship with the divinity and, in the case of Satanism, with evil beings, although encouraging the loss of independence and moral integri¬ty, offers them the advantage of feeling protected by a formid¬able power. Furthermore, this helps create the image of a despot¬ic and terrible supreme being, jealous of his supremacy, arrogant and opposed to any relationship based on solidarity and on the promotion of values. Characteristics: What are the personality characteristics of those who are devoted to divinities with Satanic features? i)There is a clearly masochistic tendency, manifested by a weak temperament, by the inclination to self-deprivation, by the need to feel weak and impotent, by the voluntary renunciation of all sense of freedom and personal responsibility. The basic tendency, then, is one of self-destruction or damage to oneself for the sake of preventing hostility on the part of others or leading others to pity towards oneself. In this regard, one need only think of the passive, irrational acceptance of “unquestioned leaders”, whose orders are blindly obeyed. ii)A profound sense of guilt, due to the difficulty in becoming aware of the ambiguity of the human situation. Quite explicitly, From maintains that “in the authoritarian sphere, recognition of one’s own sins produces fear above all, because one knows one has disobeyed a powerful authority which…will spare no punishment. Moral failure is an act of rebellion, and the only way to make reparation is an orgy of self-humiliation. The sinner feels himself depraved and impotent; he entrusts himself to the mercy of the authority and in that way hopes for forgiveness. To repent means to tremble”. He yields without any resistance to the healers. III)The introjections in strong, imposing terms, of the de¬mands of one’s surroundings, which leads one to perceive the society, with its law and culture and family, as tyrannical. On the one hand, these lead to the fear of destruction; on the other hand, paradoxically, to the relentless drive to act in negative and self-destructive ways. iv)The orientation towards death and dead objects, which is an expression of a longing for a continual transformation of self, society and the surrounding world into a cemetery or an automated factory. The use of black funeral curtains in the meeting hall, the presence of skulls and terrifying images, the wearing of hoods during ritual actions, the sacrifice of animals and, unfortunately, sometimes also of humans, are the more vivid proofs of this “necrophilic tendency”. According to a psychologist, the worshipper of Satan repre¬sents a pressing and often tragic “warning bell”. He is in no way oriented towards personal growth, towards a sincere and authentic relationship with others, towards a commitment of service to others. Rather, he betrays strong, worrisome self-destructive tendencies, further manifested by hiding and flight, and by the voluntary renunciation, to some extent, of his own will in favour of a despotic authority, demanding only blind obedience and rigid behaviour with obsessive involvement in formulas and magical rites. This is frequently observed in the so-called “healing sessions”. Conclusion: We have to be on guard against the abuses that are taking places in our parishes. In the name of healing, there are many vested interests: personal enhancement, greed, name and fame, megalomania, jealousy, sense of insecurity. The Church in Goa needs to be revitalized through the Word of God, through prayer and discernment on the part of the Church authorities, leaders and the people at large.

PATRIARCHAL SEMINARY OF RACHOL:

We celebrate today 400th year of its foundation.

The  Patriarchal Seminary of Rachol dates back to the  first decade  of  17th century. Founded by the Jesuits, it  was  called College of All Saints, as its foundation stone was laid on  their feast  day, on November 1, 1606. The building was inaugurated in 1610 and named later on  College of Saint Ignatius, as the Found­er of the Society of Jesus was canonized in 1622.

Since 1574, there was a College of the Holy Spirit, close to their  church of Margão. The Marathas frequently invaded Salsete taluka and burnt many of its churches.  In 1579 they burnt  the Holy Spirit College in Margãao. This necessitated the transfer of this  College in 1580 to the residence of Our Lady of  Snows  at Rachol.  Then it was renamed as College of Our Lady of Snows.  In 1606,  with the help of King Dom Sebastião of Portugal  and  with the contributions from the “Communidades” or neighbouring village
communities, the College of Rachol was founded.

The  coat  of  arms of the King Dom  Sebastião  of  Portugal (1568-1578) is engraved in bold relief above the main door  ofthe building. The inscription just below the arms reads thus:  ”ARMAS DELREI D.SEBASTIAO, FUNDADOR DESTE COLEGIO (‘The arms of the king D.Sebastião, founder of the College’).

To the left of the entrance is a staircase of black laterite stone leading to the superior floor, where there is a hall  named after him and adorned with his life-size portrait on horse-back.

The King D.Sebastião died in the fight of Alkacer-Kebir  in May  1579. Since the news of the King’s death was received, the portrait  was  put in the Rector’s Hall,  thus perpetuating  the recognition  of the Royal Founder (Fundador Real) of the  College
for his funds. This circumstance led to call the Seminary  ”Semi­nário Real” (Royal Seminary).

The portrait was painted by an Italian artist and placed  in the main hall of the College, called “Sala de D.Sebastião”  (Hall of  Don Sebastian), where it is customary to hold the “Conselho dos Estudos do Seminário”.

The engineer André Constâncio Augusto, hailing from  Rachol  intra  muros and son-in-law  of F.N.Pires (the same one who  executed the building “Town Hall” of Mumbay), at the request of  the Jesuit  Fathers made  a copy of this portrait in 1840 and put  it in the old frame of 1783.  This copy was the model for the General Assa.

It was executed under the technical direction of the General José Frederico d’Assa Castelo in 1892, when he was Director of Public Work.

When  the Jesuits were expelled by the Royal Letters,  dated September 3, 1759 (from Portugal), and April 1, 1760 (from its colonies),  the Oratorians were chosen by the Marquis  of  Pombal himself to replace them.

The management under the Oratorian Priests continued from 1761  to 1774. The Royal Letter (Carta Régia) of April  4,  1761, speaks  of the Oratorians as “well educated and very  exemplary”.  It  was  during the time of the twenty-first Archbishop  of  Goa, D.António Taveira de Neiva Brun e Silveira, that being under  the Oratorians  the College of Rachol was officially  constituted  by the  Decree of January 4, 1762 into a Diocesan Seminary with  the name  of “Seminary of Good Shepherd” (Seminário do  Bom  Pastor), under the protection of Child Jesus.

But the Seminary had to be suddenly closed down in 1774 due to financial difficulties. It was reopened seven years later. Then,  the  Vincentians or Lazarists (from  the Congregation  of Saint  Vincent  de  Paul) took charge of  the  administration  of 
Rachol Seminary in 1781 and continued up to 1789.

From  1793 to 1835 Rachol Seminary was managed again by  the Oratorian Priests, because the Vincentians left. Finally, in 1835 the  Seminary  was entrusted to the Diocesan clergy  and  renamed Seminário Patriarcal de Rachol.

After  a difficult period of transition  (1835-1843),  there were  radical reforms in different areas of  priestly  formation. When  Archbishop João Crisóstomo d’Amorim Pessoa took  charge  of the Archdiocese of Goa in 1862, he brought in many changes in the academic and disciplinary fields. In 1882, Dom Antonio  Sebastião Valente  (1882-1908),  Magnus Vir ab Infantia, landed in  Goa  to take  charge of the Archdiocese of Goa. The first Patriarch of East Indies brought in tremendous changes in the entire gamut of Seminary life in Rachol. 

This “great man” made  a few additions to the main building, such as a new wing with forty rooms (20 on the first floor and 20 on the ground floor), a library hall, a dormitory (Camarata)  for the  students and an infirmary (Enfermaria), in 1890, during  the tenure of Msgr.Pedro Remgio das Merces Barreto as a Vice-Rector.  He  also provided a set of rules and regulations suitable to  the new   circumstances and reorganized the Seminary  curriculum.  He codified  them and published on August 4, 1901 the “Novo  Regula­mento do Seminário de Rachol” on the occasion of the 20th anniver­sary  of his Episcopal Ordination, August 4, 1901.

Since  the Seminary was entrusted to the Diocesan Clergy  in 1835, there have been diocesan Rectors who have contributed a lot towards the progress of the life of the Seminary. 

Rachol Seminary inherited its printing press from its prede­cessor,  St.Paul’s College, in Old Goa. It was the third  in  Goa (or  the same from St.Paul’s College, Old Goa) and the fourth  in Asia.  The first book to be printed and published at the  College of  Rachol  in Roman characters was Christian Purana in  1616  by Thomas  Stephens  and the last one Regras da Companhia  in  1674. During  the  span of 58 years, 16 books have  been brought  out. Among  them Doutrina Christã in 1622–a work on  Christian  doctrine–and Konkani Grammar in 1640, both by Thomas Stephens.

Today the Seminary marches on with the signs of the times. A lot  of changes have been brought about and many more are  desir­able  for the training of the priests for the  Third Millennium. The curriculum of studies has been updated, the regency programme has been reorganized.

The  building has naturally its maintenance  problems,  like dampness  of  walls and high humidity, due to which  the  inmates have  health  problems,  like respiratory  tract infections  and allergic  conditions. Some remedial measures are being taken and the  work  of repairs is going on full swing. Shortcomings are there, but the effort of renewal is not lacking.
1)Cf.Pe.Francisco  de  Souza, Oriente Conquistado,  I,  D.2, p.32.

2)For  details,  see Gabriel de Saldanha, História de Goa; Msgr.Francisco  Xavier  Gomes Catão, Primeiro Seminário  de  Goa; Quadricentenário da Arquidiocese de Goa, 1533-1933; Monografia do Seminário de Rachol, 1935;  Joseph WICKI, SJ, ed.Documenta Indica (1592-1594),  vol.XVI, 1984; Nora Secco de Souza,  ”Rachol Semi­nary:  Torch-Bearer  of Catholicism in India”, Goa  Today,  June 1969; Msgr.Carmo da Silva, “Memorable Jubilee”,  NT,  Aug.1976; Joseph  Velinkar, “Jesuit Educational Style in Sixteenth  Century Goa”, Indica, March 1984.

Dasara (or Dussehra, literally, “the tenth day”) follows immediately the Navaratri.

The month of Ashwin (September-October) begins with the “novena” of Navraratri (lit., nine nights). On this festival the feminine aspect of God is celebrated: Saraswati, the gentle, lovable, and refined wife of Brahma; and Durga, the warrior-goddess. During the Navaratra, Saraswati is venerated mainly in the West and the South, whilst Durga is venerated in the North and the East, especially in West Bengal. 

Saraswati is the goddess of wisdom, literature, and the fine arts. Every day a garland of fresh flowers is presented to the goddess. An oil-lamp must be kept burning throughout, the lamp is called “mandadeep”.

Durga festival is celebrated in the North with pomp. Durga is the personification of the “power of God” (or shakti). She takes on the role of punishing the wicked and destroying evil and the establishment of divine reign. Also known as Mother Goddess, Kali, Laxmi, Ambika, each one with its own meaning and myths. After five days she “leaves” the statue, which is then immersed in water on Dussehra day (Vijayadashami).

     Dasara commemorates the victory of Rama over Ravana who had kidnapped his wife Sita and taken her to Lanka. Rama, along with is brother Lakshamana and devoted follower Hanuman, and an army of monkeys fought a great battle to rescue his lovely wife Sita. The war against Ravana lasted for ten days and the story of Rama and Sita is recounted with affection and love in the great epic Ramayana. It is celebrated with fast, rituals and pomp for physical, mental and spiritual power. It marks the end of scorching summer and the start of winter season.

Rama was a great believer in the powers of goddess Durga, and he is supposed to have prayed to her for nine days before he himself entered the battle-field on the tenth day and killed Ravana. People proclaimed it as the greatest victory of good over evil.

Huge effigies of Ravana, the demon-king of Lanka, his brother Kumbhakaran and his son Meghnadh are made, and filled with large quantities of crackers and fireworks. At just about sunset, an actor depicting Rama shoots an arrow from his bow (Ramlila), which hits the Ravana effigy in his navel where a pot of nectar, the reason for Ravana’s invincibility, was stored. Then all three effigies are set to fire, and there is much merry-making.

Today the weapons are too deadly to be “worshipped”. People no longer look forward to wars. We need peace. So the significance of Dasara has rightly been shifted from war to peace, from fight against neighbouring rulers to fight against injustice. Instead of worshiping weapons, people offer tools of agriculture, vehicles, machines, children’s school books, pens, pencils and household articles as means of fighting ignorance, injustice, evil. It is a day of fellowship and friendship.

   We should understand here the personification of God’s attributes as “females”. The biblical book of Wisdom personifies the Wisdom of God as a “female”. God is spirit, neither male nor female, but can be represented as “father” (as usually) or “mother” (as sometimes he is referred to).

Dasro – the Goan way
Published on: October 16, 2010 – 23:23
By Rohit R Phalgaonkar
Today will be the culmination of the nine-night Hindu festival of
Navraatri. In other parts of India it is called as Dussehra, whereas in
Goa it is called as ‘Dasro’. The term ‘Dasro’ refers to the tenth day in
Konkani. Perhaps it has originated form the Konkani word ‘Dasar’, which
refers to the 10 day rituals in Temples by the pujaaris who take turn in
serving the deity.
Dasro is an occasion where different divinities are seen in their best
attire. It is believed that all the deities and divine powers step on the
Earth on this day. The celebration of Dasro in Goa varies from taluka to
taluka and temple to temple. The celebration also depends on the history
of the temple in the case of the deities which were shifted to the New
Conquests.

On this day the deity of the temple steps out of the temple precincts.
The deities go beyond their temple limits to meet the deities outside
the boundaries of the temple. This is called as ‘Simmolaghan’,  which
means crossing the boundaries.
Normally a devotee goes to the Temple to seek blessings from the deity.
But on the Dasra day the deities of the Temple set out to meet the devotees.
The Shantadurga of Kavlem goes to each and every household seated in a
Paalkhi. Similar is the case with Shri Kamakshi, the goddess of Shiroda.
She crosses the boundaries of the Temple and meets the deity Shri
Shivnaath; the local deity of the village.
Thus, it is an occasion on which the divinities meet and embrace each other.
‘Simmolaghan’ is followed by exchanging the leaves of the Aapto tree,
which represents gold. In local terms it is called as ‘Sone Lootap’.
This leaf is taken home by the devotees and is preserved in the shrine
of the house for one year.
In some villages of Kankona, Sanguem and Kepem and Bicholim the deities
are represented by the ‘Tarangaas’. These icons are carried on the
shoulder and are taken outside.
In some villages of Sattari, Kankona Kepem Sanguem the procession of
Taranga or the Satri (icons representing the deities) is taken out. In
the village of Paingini of the Kankona taluka the Tarangaas and the
Satri, representing the goddess Shri Navdurga, are taken to the temple
courtyard and are twisted and turned on the heart throbbing beats of the
dhol and the taashaa. Then the procession moves to the Temple of Shri
Betaall, where the ritual of ‘Sone lootap’ is carried out. In the temple of

Shri Vimleshwar at Rivan in the Sanguem taluka a Tarang of the deity

stands on its own without any support after the invocation of all the deities

of the village. This happens on the eve of the Dasro festival.
On the Dasro evening at Veling in the Ponda taluka the three Paalhkis of
deities, viz. Shri Lakshmi Narsinh, Shri Vetaaleshwar and Shri Shantadurga Shankvaaleshwari are taken out from their respective Temples.

These richly decorated Paalkhis with images of the deities
inside are taken near an Aapto tree.
The three Paalkhis are swayed in the air and are touched to each other
on the beats of heart throbbing traditional drums. This is followed by
the exchange of the Apto leaf. The first leaf is offered to each deity.
After this event, the Makhar is celebrated in the temples of Shri
Lakshmi Narsinh and Shri Shantadurga Shankhvaaleshwari. These are
perhaps the only two Temples in Goa, which have the Makhars celebrated on
the night of the Dasro.
http://www.navhindtimes.in/iexplore/dasro-goan-way

What is Mando? Everyone is talking of Mando these days. Mando is a dance-song with lyrics that convey pathos and imagery. It is a concrete symbol of the synthesis of two cultures: the Latin Christian and the Indian Hindu. Nowhere else one sees a file of men dressed in purely Western outfits and a file of women in Indian costumes holding fans gently swaying back and forth to a melancholic tune. Mando conjures reminiscences of a fantasy world of yesteryear to which today’s renowned composers have added new, pressing themes that make it a felicitous blend of the new and the old. BITTER-SWEET HISTORY Mando is said to be the biography of the Goan heart: a long tale of our bitter-sweet history with all the joys and sorrows. Something that expresses with immortal lyrics the glory and the martyrdom of Goan heart with its immense capacity to love and to suffer. Any event connected with the Mando generates profound interest among its aficionados. Recently, Goa witnessed one such momentous occasion. Against the backdrop of nostalgic Mando music by Curtorechim Salkam, Dr. Maria Aurora Couto released the book “Song of Goa Crown of Mandos” written by Dr. Jose Pereira, Michael Martins and Antonio da Costa, a 497-page hardbound book, co-published by the Saligao-based Goa-1556 and Broadway Publishing House. It has proved to be the fruit of much labour, patience and dedication by those who rose to the challenging task. Dr. Couto with her well-known verve and fluency waxed nostalgic about those days when she, her late revered husband Albano and Dr. Jose Pereira formed an “inseparable” trio. While extolling the grandiosity and scholarship of Dr. Jose she made it a point to stress the latter’s simplicity and originality that make him unique, a giant among mortals. She concluded quoting lines from Dr. Jose’s touching letter of condolence upon the death of husband Albano (and this brought tears to the eyes of many). Dr. Jose Pereira, the co-author of the book, who had specially flown from US to grace the release function, rose then to speak. With precise, measured, erudite words he gave a scholarly overview about Mando and its significance. Dr. Jose Pereira is the professor emeritus of theology of Fordham University, New York, where he lectured on History of Religions. A multi-faceted multi-talented personality, he has taught and done research in various academic institutions in Lisbon, London and Varanasi and has published 16 books and over 130 articles on theology, history of art and architecture and on Goa and Konkani language, culture, literature and music. He has devoted a great part of his life to the study of Mando, something that fascinates him immensely. Dr. Jose had earlier written a trilogy of books on Mando. Because of the huge demand, no sooner these books were released, they were out of print. This obviously left a big lacuna that had to be filled. The present book “Song of Goa Crown of Mandos” is a welcome release. The word “Crown” has been aptly chosen because Mando is indeed a “crown” made of four “jewels”: Mandos of Yearning (Utrike), Mandos of Union (Ekvott), Mandos of Lamentation (Villap) and Mandos of News (Fobro). Our immortal Mando composers of yesteryear dealt poignantly with the ardent and passionate love that yearns for union. Since yearning for love at times culminates with marital bliss, at times with failure to achieve union, the love forlorn, the jilted love affair leading to despair, desolation and lament, our great composers of Mando dealt also with this aspect admirably. A sizable space has also been reserved to describe social and political events. Mandos of Fobro deal with historical happenings, scandalous fashions, clandestine affairs and anecdotes from composer’s personal life — truly a portrait of traditional Goa, depicted with humour and malice. It is said that malice delivered impersonally and without prejudice used to be a developed fine art in that bygone era. The book “Crown of Mandos” is the fruit of much scholarship and meticulous research and beyond doubt, the authors have succeeded in bringing a real treatise on Mando. They have dug through a lot of archives, taken the trouble of interviewing hundreds of people, reviewed thousands of manuscripts, and obtained a wealth of information, treading the breadth and length of Goa, Saxtti in special. As a result, we have now the voluminous reference material at our disposal in the form of a compendium: Song of Goa (Crown of Mandos). Anyone who is interested in the subject (even those who have a bent for research) can now approach mando with a scholarly mind. They are given the rare opportunity to analyze Mandos in a manner never made previously possible. Information about each Mando is under several headings. The cover is artistically designed — modern, attractive. (Since the cover is meant to be a clip from a dance sequence, it is a minus point that the lady turns her back to the male partner while the latter looks at her; sadly the all-important eye contact between both partners is lost). The printing is neat; the various sections are well-separated into different categories. This book includes an introduction to Konkani songs (of varied types); essays on the Mando and its romantic, political and social world; lyrics, scores, translations of and commentaries on many prominent Mandos; details of the lives of some Mando composers; and rules of Saxtti elision. The book is truly an encyclopedia, a Mando reliquary which will serve as a mirror for a detailed look into the past and benchmark for all the new developments around Mando. WANTED: BOOK ON DULPODS We now hope that local publishers will set themselves the task of compiling a book on Dulpods. This they could do under Dr. Jose Pereira’s guidance and help from our greats like Tomasinho Cardoso, Fr. Bernardo Cotta, Michael Gracias, Marianella, Elvis Goes, Elvis Gonsalves, Inacio Palmeira and so many others who endeavour to make Mando vibrant as well as relevant to the present generation. Incidently, at the release functionn, the performance by ‘Curtorochim Salkam’ was commendable. Irineu’s voice is rich. Celine and Cynthia, the Costa Sisters, sing beautifully. Victor’s guitar playing and chord work is exceptional. However, the ‘impromptu’ dulpod at the request of the audience was lackluster, bereft of synchronization. A Mando dancing couple or two would surely have made the occasion more memorable. (This is an edited version of the article published earlier in the Goan Observer.) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

SAN JOSÉ DE MINAS, Chile – Los nueve primeros de los 33 mineros que quedaron atrapados bajo tierra durante dos meses subió a la superficie aquí temprano por la mañana, como una operación de rescate que ha inspirado a la nación y remachado el mundo pasó a su fase final.

Después se abrazaron por varios minutos, el Sr. Yañez dio un pulgar hasta poco antes de ser llevado para un reconocimiento médico. La Sra. Núñez había propuesto al Sr. Yañez en una carta enviada a los mineros atrapados.

ascensión Sr. Yáñez llegó a más de siete horas después de la minera en primer lugar, Florencio Ávalos, de 31 años, abrió el camino a la final de un drama que ha cautivado al mundo durante dos meses. El Sr. Ávalos había viajado hasta un eje estrecho, de rescate cerca de media milla en la cápsula de diseño especial que los funcionarios habían estado probando durante gran parte del martes. Poco después de la medianoche, los cuernos sonaron como la cápsula alcanza la superficie con el señor dentro de Ávalos. Con una mirada de tranquilidad robusta, abrazó a su familia, el presidente de su país y los trabajadores a su alrededor antes de ser llevado en una camilla, dando un pulgar hacia arriba como se fue.

Cinco mineros más seguido después. Con cada uno de ellos, el mundo parecía para celebrar, sino también a contener la respiración colectiva que los 33 llegaría a cabo tan fácilmente como la primera ones.The minero segundos para alcanzar la superficie, Mario Sepúlveda, fue exuberante cuando salía de la cápsula, miembros de la familia abrazos y funcionarios. Abrazó a Piñera en tres ocasiones y la gente presentó con regalos: las rocas de la mina. Luego dirigió a la multitud en una ovación. “Chi, Chi, Chi, le, le, le,” gritaron. “Mineros de Chile”, un estribillo que se hizo eco de los mineros posteriores llegaron a la superficie.

En las profundidades de la mina, 25 mineros otros esperaban su turno, junto con un trabajador de rescate que había descendido a su refugio subterráneo en la cápsula estrecha, la cual fue pintada con los colores rojo, blanco y azul de la bandera chilena.

Cuando el rescatador finalmente llegó a los mineros la noche del martes, fue recibido con entusiastas apretones de manos de los hombres.

El día había sido uno de gran emoción y los retrasos de última hora. Como Piñera esperó con ansiedad cerca del agujero de rescate, los familiares de los mineros y más de 1.300 periodistas se reunieron alrededor de los televisores de plasma hasta en el campamento de la Esperanza, el campamento improvisado que vibraba con un ambiente parecido a un carnaval como el rescate se acercó. En un momento dado, el Sr. Piñera se mezclaban con las familias e incluso rompió a cantar con ellos.

“El día finalmente ha llegado”, dijo Marta Mesías, de 51 años, la tía de un minero, Claudio Yáñez, de 34 años. “Vamos a brindar con champán él, y darle de comer un poco de pollo asado.”

La operación se espera que tome uno o dos días, con Luis Urzúa, de 54 años, el líder de turno que organizó la vida de los mineros en la mina, el último en llegar.

La carrera para salvar a los mineros se ha abierto a Chile en un centro de atención a menudo ha buscado, pero con experiencia en raras ocasiones. Si bien elogió por su gestión económica y la austeridad, la nación ha encontrado a menudo la atención del mundo capacitado a más de sus violaciónes de los derechos humanos y los desastres naturales que en momentos edificantes.

Pero la perseverancia de los mineros, atrapados bajo tierra hasta ahora en un espacio sin luz, húmeda, ha traspasado el mundo con una historia universal de la lucha humana y la operación enormemente compleja para rescatarlos.

Se ha involucrado a muchos millones de dólares, los especialistas de la NASA y expertos de perforación de una docena de países más o menos. Algunos aquí en la mina han comparado el esfuerzo de rescate para la misión espacial Apolo 13, por la tensión emocional que ha causado y la expectativa de un suspiro colectivo de alivio al final.

“Esperamos que con la ayuda de Dios esta epopeya terminará de una manera feliz”, dijo Piñera antes de que el rescate comenzó.

A pesar de las altas expectativas, los funcionarios de aquí advirtió que la operación aún estaba en una fase muy precaria. El agujero de rescate es apenas más ancha que la cápsula que viajará dentro de él, yendo y viniendo a los hombres cerca de 2.000 pies a la superficie, uno a la vez. Para complicar las cosas, el agujero no es ni siquiera recta, provocando temores de que la cápsula podría engancharse en el largo viaje.
La decisión de Piñera, en primer lugar de Chile, líder de la derecha en 20 años, poner en juego su presidencia de jóvenes en un impulso desenfrenado para rescatar a los mineros fue un cálculo político extraordinario. Pero ha pagado grandes dividendos, reforzando su popularidad en el país y que le impulsaron a un escenario internacional a menudo dominado por otras grandes personalidades de la región.

Después de un derrumbe atrapó a los mineros el 5 de agosto, su destino era incierto, en el mejor de los casos. Asesores de Piñera le aconsejó no crear expectativas que puedan ser encontrados con vida. Laurence Golborne, el ministro de Minería, dijo públicamente que sus posibilidades de haber sobrevivido eran escasas, los comentarios que molestó a muchos chilenos.

Pero el señor Piñera, que estaba en Ecuador cuando llegaron las noticias de los mineros perdidos, argumentó de manera diferente. “Yo tenía una fuerte convicción, muy profundo dentro de mí, que estaban vivos, y que fue un gran apoyo de mis acciones”, dijo en una entrevista a finales de agosto.

Se puso en marcha un intenso esfuerzo de rescate, sin escatimar gastos. Trabajadores perforó un pozo flaco, y el 22 de agosto un martillo de perforación llegó con pintura roja. Envuelto alrededor de él con bandas de goma fueron dos notas: una carta de amor de Mario Gómez, el más antiguo minero del grupo, a su esposa, y otro en tinta roja. “Estamos bien en el refugio de los 33″, decía.

De repente, el nombre de la vigilia improvisada en la mina – Campamento Esperanza – tomó un nuevo significado. Piñera voló aquí justo después de despertar a su padre en la ley para celebrar con las familias de los mineros.

Pero los chilenos se encontraban en territorio desconocido. Para su conocimiento, nadie había intentado un rescate hasta ahora bajo tierra. Mantener vivos a los mineros y de buen humor, y mucho menos salir, sería un enorme desafío.

Los médicos de la NASA y oficiales de la Armada de Chile con experiencia en submarinos fueron consultados sobre las cepas de la reclusión prolongada. Los mineros habían perdido mucho peso y se vive de raciones de emergencia. Algunos, como el señor Gómez, que tenía una enfermedad pulmonar, problemas con la alta humedad en la mina.

Funcionarios médicos consultados con frecuencia con los mineros en un teléfono modificado se dejó caer a través de la perforación flaco. Poco a poco, se alimentó a los hombres de regreso a la salud. El ministro de Salud Jaime Mañalich alistó Yonny Barrios, un minero que había una vez un curso de primeros auxilios, para administrar las vacunas y medicamentos, y para tomar muestras de sangre y orina. Todos los medicamentos que viajó a través de los tubos de plástico enviado a través de las perforaciones.

Los tubos, llamados “palomas” aquí, se convirtió en línea de vida de los mineros. En las últimas semanas muchos funcionarios en la superficie que utiliza para enviar cartas de sus seres queridos, los alimentos y líquidos, incluso un pequeño sistema de proyección de vídeo que los mineros utilizan para ver películas grabadas y fútbol en vivo los partidos de una señal de televisión que fue corriente abajo.

Los mineros fueron puestos en una dieta para mantener su peso y trabajó con un entrenador para estar en forma con ejercicio. Un minero, un aficionado al gimnasio, corría unos seis kilómetros al día a través de los ejes de liquidación de la mina.

En las últimas semanas, Alejandro Pino, el gerente regional de una compañía de seguros por accidentes de trabajo, ha dado a la formación de los mineros los medios de comunicación sobre la forma de hablar y expresarse, incluso el envío de un ejemplar enrollado de su guía a través de la perforación.

“Traté de prepararlos para manejar las preguntas de los periodistas más íntimo”, dijo el Sr. Pino la semana pasada.

Alberto Iturra, un psicólogo que trabajó con los mineros, habló con ellos, a veces varias veces al día, para ordenar a través de sus frustraciones y depresión. Después de la primera por el envío de parches de nicotina, los funcionarios más tarde enviado cigarrillos a los mineros, la mayoría de los cuales eran fumadores, miembros de la familia, dijo. Sin embargo, el Dr. Iturra dijo que los médicos nunca terminó enviando por medicamentos para la depresión.

Mientras los médicos luchaban por mantener a los mineros sanos, los ingenieros eran difíciles en cavar un agujero más grande a través del cual los mineros podrían ser tirado a la seguridad. Piñera no estaba satisfecho con una opción, por lo que puso en marcha tres iniciativas para perforar un agujero de rescate con éxito: los planes A, B y C.

Por último, el pasado sábado a las 8:05 de la mañana, la plataforma de perforación Plan B se abrió paso a los mineros exuberante. Cada uno de rescate se espera que tome alrededor de una hora, incluido el tiempo que se necesita para colocar la cápsula en el orificio.

A pesar de que los mineros son mitificado aquí para sobrevivir a su cautiverio subterráneos, otros en la superficie se están beneficiando. El Sr. Golborne, un ex director ejecutivo de una cadena de tiendas al por menor que no tiene afiliación política, se ha convertido en el ministro más popular de Chile. Pasa muchas tardes en itinerancia Campamento de la Esperanza en su cazadora roja, jugando a las cartas con las familias de los mineros y patadas a un balón con los niños.

“Golborne Bachelet es la nueva”, dijo Marta Lagos, un analista político en Santiago, en referencia a Michelle Bachelet, el ex presidente popular. “Salió al cabo la vista pública de la nada. Se trata de un hombre que dice que no tiene ambición política y no está interesado en la política. Bachelet, solía decir la misma cosa. “