There are 193 countries in the world
Out of this 15-20 countries form the World Cup Cricket.
Some 33 countries team against one another to form World Cup Football/Soccer.
(Please fill in the blanks about how many go for World Cup version of Basketball. I don't know the number).
One country makes up the "World" in the World Series Baseball ~ America.
In America, Super Bowl or World Series [American] Football is considered the most famous game in the "World". All of America watches it.
Friday, September 29, 2006
Another Debate that Went Way into the Night --- About Texts and People and their Interrelation
But have you read the Quran? No? Then how are you so sure that the Quran says just that and that? How do you know so much about the Quran anyway? Where does your information come from? How is it that you trust your media so much?
Coming to the media, have you ever wondered what the media means?
You live in America. Arabic media does not reach you here. No news of Iraq and Pakistan and Afghanistan until given to you through American TV, newspaper and the .coms.
[And yes, that holds true for India too. You only know the war fought upon the Indian land through the Indian perspective. Isn’t that how History is formed, with the sea saw heavily tilted to one side? (Don’t you think there must have been more freedom fighters who fought for India’s independence, many of who must have been Muslim? I don’t know the name of any though. But isn’t that how History is formed?)]
But the Quran still does not feature into all this. Just like the Bible does not feature into how the American media conducts itself.
Are you very sure the removal of Islam from politics in Islamic countries will bring peace and order?
Stalin ruled and murdered without religion, so did Hitler.
Killing Jews does seem like a very religious thing to do…Jews being a religious sect. How come you don’t view the World Wars as a religious war? How come you don’t bring the Bible into this entire picture?
Why do I feel that had Hitler been a religious person he would not have killed?
Slavery was justified using the Bible.
And what about Abu Gharib torture and abuse? Why do you not blame Christianity for this inhumanity? Why is the Abu Gharib just another political/moral crisis?
Would you call such torture if conducted by Iraqies another political/moral crisis?
I quote from wikipedia. This is Ameen Saeed Al-Sheik, detainee No. 151362 telling about what happened at the Abu Gharib prison.
'Do you pray to Allah?' one asked. I said yes. They said, '[Expletive] you. And [expletive] him.' One of them said, 'You are not getting out of here health[y], you are getting out of here handicapped. And he said to me, 'Are you married?' I said, 'Yes.' They said, 'If your wife saw you like this, she will be disappointed.' One of them said, 'But if I saw her now she would not be disappointed now because I would rape her.'" [...] "They ordered me to thank Jesus that I'm alive." [...] "I said to him, 'I believe in Allah.' So he said, 'But I believe in torture and I will torture you.'
( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib_torture_and_prisoner_abuse)
“Jesus” is used as a word here, would that make this a Christian crime?
When you say Muslims always put their religion before their nation, before love, before life, before humanity, do you mean ALL Muslims or just certain Muslims? A substantial percentage of the African American population is Muslim, as is a substantial population of Black Africa. Do you think the African Americans will fight for Iraq in a war between the US and Iraq?
Why don’t you think of the African Americans as Muslims? They worship Allah too, why are they not a part of the Jihad?
Why do brown skinned, tall, dreamy eyed men come to your mind when you think Muslim? What about the black skinned? The mongolian featured?
If the fault is in the religion itself wouldn’t it affect everyone and anyone practising it?
And if Islam turns people evil because the Quran says so, what about Taslima Nasreen? What about Rushdie? Nushrat Fateh Ali Khan? And the SEVERAL other singers. What about Shah Rukh Khan and the other Khan dons of Bollywood? What about cricket? What about Michael Jackson who converted in 2003? What about Mohammad Ali?
How come you don’t attribute these people’s secularism to the Quran?
Give me proof that a Muslim general in the Indian army will sell India to Pakistan. So far I hear no names.
And what about Gulzaar and Ghalib and Javed Akhtar and Shabaana Aazmi and A.R.Rehman?
Is creativity a product of the Quran too?
In Nepal, the only Hindu country in the world, there are armed policemen standing at temple gates to keep non-Hindus out. That translates to violent, religious discrimination, doesn’t it? If the American TV showed pictures of men with guns standing before Pashupati Nath, what would everybody else think about the Hindus?
Do the Shiv Senas represent Shiva?
But if the media tried and the audience REALLY wanted to then would it not be the easiest thing to represent Hindus as a bunch of miserable fanatics?
It’s not about religion, not about Hinduism or Christianity or Islam. Religion and relgious texts have nothing at all to do with the state of our world. But yes, dogmatism, indifference, irrationality, cruelty, herd mentality, close mindedness, hate, superior/inferior complexes, fear, greed…these are responsible. Just like Christianity did not teach the prison guards to torture the Abu Gharib prisoners and the Bible did not allow the Western world to enslave people from Africa and Ramayan does not tell us to domolish mosques and burn our brides for dowry, the Quran does not propagate violence…and unless you have read Quran as it is, interpreted it as it is, weighed and counterweighed all its arguments and complexities, understood it without bias and prejudice, there is no argument at all.
By the way, had there been a direct co-relation between texts and practices, Hindus would have been a group of sexually expressive and free people who believed in swayambhars and love marriages and single parenthood, the Christians would have been absolutely Virgin, and the book that allows a woman divorce, takes a woman’s consent before marriage, gives her the security of Mehr would have treated women folks with so much more respect.
Coming to the media, have you ever wondered what the media means?
You live in America. Arabic media does not reach you here. No news of Iraq and Pakistan and Afghanistan until given to you through American TV, newspaper and the .coms.
[And yes, that holds true for India too. You only know the war fought upon the Indian land through the Indian perspective. Isn’t that how History is formed, with the sea saw heavily tilted to one side? (Don’t you think there must have been more freedom fighters who fought for India’s independence, many of who must have been Muslim? I don’t know the name of any though. But isn’t that how History is formed?)]
But the Quran still does not feature into all this. Just like the Bible does not feature into how the American media conducts itself.
Are you very sure the removal of Islam from politics in Islamic countries will bring peace and order?
Stalin ruled and murdered without religion, so did Hitler.
Killing Jews does seem like a very religious thing to do…Jews being a religious sect. How come you don’t view the World Wars as a religious war? How come you don’t bring the Bible into this entire picture?
Why do I feel that had Hitler been a religious person he would not have killed?
Slavery was justified using the Bible.
And what about Abu Gharib torture and abuse? Why do you not blame Christianity for this inhumanity? Why is the Abu Gharib just another political/moral crisis?
Would you call such torture if conducted by Iraqies another political/moral crisis?
I quote from wikipedia. This is Ameen Saeed Al-Sheik, detainee No. 151362 telling about what happened at the Abu Gharib prison.
'Do you pray to Allah?' one asked. I said yes. They said, '[Expletive] you. And [expletive] him.' One of them said, 'You are not getting out of here health[y], you are getting out of here handicapped. And he said to me, 'Are you married?' I said, 'Yes.' They said, 'If your wife saw you like this, she will be disappointed.' One of them said, 'But if I saw her now she would not be disappointed now because I would rape her.'" [...] "They ordered me to thank Jesus that I'm alive." [...] "I said to him, 'I believe in Allah.' So he said, 'But I believe in torture and I will torture you.'
( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib_torture_and_prisoner_abuse)
“Jesus” is used as a word here, would that make this a Christian crime?
When you say Muslims always put their religion before their nation, before love, before life, before humanity, do you mean ALL Muslims or just certain Muslims? A substantial percentage of the African American population is Muslim, as is a substantial population of Black Africa. Do you think the African Americans will fight for Iraq in a war between the US and Iraq?
Why don’t you think of the African Americans as Muslims? They worship Allah too, why are they not a part of the Jihad?
Why do brown skinned, tall, dreamy eyed men come to your mind when you think Muslim? What about the black skinned? The mongolian featured?
If the fault is in the religion itself wouldn’t it affect everyone and anyone practising it?
And if Islam turns people evil because the Quran says so, what about Taslima Nasreen? What about Rushdie? Nushrat Fateh Ali Khan? And the SEVERAL other singers. What about Shah Rukh Khan and the other Khan dons of Bollywood? What about cricket? What about Michael Jackson who converted in 2003? What about Mohammad Ali?
How come you don’t attribute these people’s secularism to the Quran?
Give me proof that a Muslim general in the Indian army will sell India to Pakistan. So far I hear no names.
And what about Gulzaar and Ghalib and Javed Akhtar and Shabaana Aazmi and A.R.Rehman?
Is creativity a product of the Quran too?
In Nepal, the only Hindu country in the world, there are armed policemen standing at temple gates to keep non-Hindus out. That translates to violent, religious discrimination, doesn’t it? If the American TV showed pictures of men with guns standing before Pashupati Nath, what would everybody else think about the Hindus?
Do the Shiv Senas represent Shiva?
But if the media tried and the audience REALLY wanted to then would it not be the easiest thing to represent Hindus as a bunch of miserable fanatics?
It’s not about religion, not about Hinduism or Christianity or Islam. Religion and relgious texts have nothing at all to do with the state of our world. But yes, dogmatism, indifference, irrationality, cruelty, herd mentality, close mindedness, hate, superior/inferior complexes, fear, greed…these are responsible. Just like Christianity did not teach the prison guards to torture the Abu Gharib prisoners and the Bible did not allow the Western world to enslave people from Africa and Ramayan does not tell us to domolish mosques and burn our brides for dowry, the Quran does not propagate violence…and unless you have read Quran as it is, interpreted it as it is, weighed and counterweighed all its arguments and complexities, understood it without bias and prejudice, there is no argument at all.
By the way, had there been a direct co-relation between texts and practices, Hindus would have been a group of sexually expressive and free people who believed in swayambhars and love marriages and single parenthood, the Christians would have been absolutely Virgin, and the book that allows a woman divorce, takes a woman’s consent before marriage, gives her the security of Mehr would have treated women folks with so much more respect.
Thursday, September 28, 2006
And another character from Ramayan
I wonder sometimes...
Why is it that we find it so difficult to forgive Kekai?
Her flaw is she wanted the throne for her son…or perhaps she wanted the throne for herself… to rule through her son… after all she was the warrior amongst all other queens Dashrath was married to.
Kekai chose the throne over Ram.
Ram chose the throne over Sita.
Why is it so easy to not forgive Kekai?
And why is Ram a god?
Kekai was instigated by Manthra. Ram was instigated by the washerman. But Kekai must bear our anger for eternity while Ram somehow slips into the role of the wronged person. Bechara Ram.
Why not Bechaari Kekai?
Why is it that we find it so difficult to forgive Kekai?
Her flaw is she wanted the throne for her son…or perhaps she wanted the throne for herself… to rule through her son… after all she was the warrior amongst all other queens Dashrath was married to.
Kekai chose the throne over Ram.
Ram chose the throne over Sita.
Why is it so easy to not forgive Kekai?
And why is Ram a god?
Kekai was instigated by Manthra. Ram was instigated by the washerman. But Kekai must bear our anger for eternity while Ram somehow slips into the role of the wronged person. Bechara Ram.
Why not Bechaari Kekai?
Tuesday, September 26, 2006
Continuing a Debate
On the contrary, Sita does have the characters I aspire towards.
She is learned, rich, beloved of her parents.
She marries a valiant and handsome prince, one who is deserving of her and who must prove this worth.
She is loyal and loving and would rather live uncomfortably in forests with her husband than without him in the comfort of a palace.
She is playful and wants a golden deer.
She remains loyal to Ram during captivity.
She trusts Ram to remain loyal towards her. Upon rescue she does not demand an agni pariksha of him though she could have wondered what Ram had been up to while she was away.
Her trust matches her love.
After the washerman incident she leaves Ram's palace to never return.
Her self esteem is fiercer than her love.
She is proud and capable and does an excellent job at being a single parent.
Her sons can defeat kings, including their wise father, at war and at logics.
She is as intellegent as she is strong.
When Ram, harrowed by guilt, loneliness and love asks Sita to forgive and return to him she is willing to forgive but not forget.
She will not return. She will rather die.
Sita’s suicide makes me shiver.
Her pride makes me shiver.
The lies that are woven around her name makes me shiver.
I wasn’t taught to view her final act as anything but a supernatural episode. But perhaps, I think, when pestered by royalty she jumped into the river. Perhaps she walked away into a thick forest from which she never emerged. Perhaps she simply said no. Perhaps she said to her sons, choose, and they chose and so she left. Perhaps she said to Ram he was no longer worth her.
She is an admirable woman but I wouldn’t want to worship her, not because she is not worth the worship but because the centuries have distorted her image, made her weak, simplified her, forgotten her as anything other than Ram’s consort. The centuries have removed the complexity from the text.
If there is a temple for Sita, there should also be one for Draupadi.
Draupadi teaches me how I can continue to live in an unfair world without losing my place.
Why are children not named Draupadi?
I don’t want Sita to be a goddess in the same way I don’t want fire around children. Children are careless and mean and more often than not will create disaster with fire. They will set the house to fire. They will burn ants and butterflies.
I don’t want Sita to be a goddess the same way I don’t want fire around moths.
Moths will be fascinated with what they cannot handle.
Perhaps when we mature, perhaps when we can understand better, perhaps then we can return to Sita.
But for till then, I wouldn’t mind if her name and her tales were removed from our minds, completely, without a trace…
She is learned, rich, beloved of her parents.
She marries a valiant and handsome prince, one who is deserving of her and who must prove this worth.
She is loyal and loving and would rather live uncomfortably in forests with her husband than without him in the comfort of a palace.
She is playful and wants a golden deer.
She remains loyal to Ram during captivity.
She trusts Ram to remain loyal towards her. Upon rescue she does not demand an agni pariksha of him though she could have wondered what Ram had been up to while she was away.
Her trust matches her love.
After the washerman incident she leaves Ram's palace to never return.
Her self esteem is fiercer than her love.
She is proud and capable and does an excellent job at being a single parent.
Her sons can defeat kings, including their wise father, at war and at logics.
She is as intellegent as she is strong.
When Ram, harrowed by guilt, loneliness and love asks Sita to forgive and return to him she is willing to forgive but not forget.
She will not return. She will rather die.
Sita’s suicide makes me shiver.
Her pride makes me shiver.
The lies that are woven around her name makes me shiver.
I wasn’t taught to view her final act as anything but a supernatural episode. But perhaps, I think, when pestered by royalty she jumped into the river. Perhaps she walked away into a thick forest from which she never emerged. Perhaps she simply said no. Perhaps she said to her sons, choose, and they chose and so she left. Perhaps she said to Ram he was no longer worth her.
She is an admirable woman but I wouldn’t want to worship her, not because she is not worth the worship but because the centuries have distorted her image, made her weak, simplified her, forgotten her as anything other than Ram’s consort. The centuries have removed the complexity from the text.
If there is a temple for Sita, there should also be one for Draupadi.
Draupadi teaches me how I can continue to live in an unfair world without losing my place.
Why are children not named Draupadi?
I don’t want Sita to be a goddess in the same way I don’t want fire around children. Children are careless and mean and more often than not will create disaster with fire. They will set the house to fire. They will burn ants and butterflies.
I don’t want Sita to be a goddess the same way I don’t want fire around moths.
Moths will be fascinated with what they cannot handle.
Perhaps when we mature, perhaps when we can understand better, perhaps then we can return to Sita.
But for till then, I wouldn’t mind if her name and her tales were removed from our minds, completely, without a trace…
Friday, September 22, 2006
Some Old Songs
What I miss in the new songs is the honesty of the old lyrics and the simplicity of their music. The more I listen to new songs, the more I find myself going back to the older ones for their straight, stark poetry, the confidence with which an emotion was talked about and the poise with which an instrument was experimented with.
Even philosophy was unapologetic then. What can be more philosophical and preachy than sajan re jhoot mat bolo, khuda ke paas jaana hai, or nanhe munhe rahi teri mutthi mei kya hai? Mutthi me hai takdeer meri. And yet, it is just that, saying just that much and saying it clear and loud without any distracting, computerized music. I listen and I marvel.
Sad songs, of late, are so philosophical. But pure sadness…I wonder…when I listen to unapologetically sad songs like jaane wo kaise log the jinke pyaar ko pyaar mila, or ek akela is sheher main, or dil ke arman aansoonon mein beh gaye, or badi sooni sooni hai zindagi ye zindagi, or yeh duniya, ye mehfil mere kaam ki nahin… I cannot help but be surprised at how straight and to the point they are. These are intensely personal songs, sung from a subjective point of view, without ascribing a wider meaning to an individual’s grief.
And joy and attraction and a plethora of madness…I cannot help laughing everytime I listen to pag ghungru baandh meera naachi thi, and what the hell does kishore kumar do right before singing thodi si jo pee lee hai, chori to nahin kee hai…??? and the total chaos of mere bhole balam, and ek chatur naar, and if you haven’t heard In haathon se sabki gaadi chal rahi hai, wah wah, you absolutely have to because it is crazy!
And the sexiness of songs like paan khaye saiyan hamar, saavli suratiya aur hooth lal lal, hai hai malmal ka kurta, malmal ke kurte pe cheet lal lal !!!
What is as sexy as badan pe sitare lapete hue
What compliments better than ae meri Zohar Jabeen
What more energetic than chalat musaafir moh liya re or kajra mohabbat wala ankhiyon me aisa daala
The list could go on forever…I just discovered hum bekhudi mei from Kala Paani and have been humming, humming and humming!
Even philosophy was unapologetic then. What can be more philosophical and preachy than sajan re jhoot mat bolo, khuda ke paas jaana hai, or nanhe munhe rahi teri mutthi mei kya hai? Mutthi me hai takdeer meri. And yet, it is just that, saying just that much and saying it clear and loud without any distracting, computerized music. I listen and I marvel.
Sad songs, of late, are so philosophical. But pure sadness…I wonder…when I listen to unapologetically sad songs like jaane wo kaise log the jinke pyaar ko pyaar mila, or ek akela is sheher main, or dil ke arman aansoonon mein beh gaye, or badi sooni sooni hai zindagi ye zindagi, or yeh duniya, ye mehfil mere kaam ki nahin… I cannot help but be surprised at how straight and to the point they are. These are intensely personal songs, sung from a subjective point of view, without ascribing a wider meaning to an individual’s grief.
And joy and attraction and a plethora of madness…I cannot help laughing everytime I listen to pag ghungru baandh meera naachi thi, and what the hell does kishore kumar do right before singing thodi si jo pee lee hai, chori to nahin kee hai…??? and the total chaos of mere bhole balam, and ek chatur naar, and if you haven’t heard In haathon se sabki gaadi chal rahi hai, wah wah, you absolutely have to because it is crazy!
And the sexiness of songs like paan khaye saiyan hamar, saavli suratiya aur hooth lal lal, hai hai malmal ka kurta, malmal ke kurte pe cheet lal lal !!!
What is as sexy as badan pe sitare lapete hue
What compliments better than ae meri Zohar Jabeen
What more energetic than chalat musaafir moh liya re or kajra mohabbat wala ankhiyon me aisa daala
The list could go on forever…I just discovered hum bekhudi mei from Kala Paani and have been humming, humming and humming!
Thursday, September 21, 2006
Cauldron
The Mormons are not Methodists.
Suburbians look down upon city dwellers.
City dwellers think suburbians are snobbish.
There is an attitude towards community college students.
Private colleges have airs.
There are neighborhoods one should not enter.
Different societies in colleges : * Indian Student Association, African Student Association, Jewish Forum, Hispanic…
Indians love fair skins. They dislike Africans.
A major part of the African population is uneducated. They cannot stand the snobbish air these ultra educated Indians wear.
WASP
Red Necks.
FOBs
Liberals watch Fox News.
Republics watch…I don’t know what. Philadelphia is heavily Liberal.
Liberals and Republics never watch each other’s television networks or listen to one another’s radio.
It is impossible for the liberal and the republic to have a real conversation
One half of the population is pretty much a wall for the other half of the population.
A liberal and republic debate in an interesting talk show. They never answer each other’s questions. They only answer and counter answer themselves.
One half of the population has no idea what the other means.
My fiction teacher thinks the poetry department is stupid.
I don’t know what the poetry department thinks. I don’t hang out with the poetry department, not really.
Fiction and poetry do not really mix.
USA is a cauldron where nothing mixes.
Go to China Town. There are only Chinese there.
Catholic Church, the Mormon Church, the Jewish Christian Church, the Orthodox Church, Baptist Church, St John the Evangelist Church, African Methodist Church, Lutheran Church, Quaker Church – Churches, their names, their people. I have entered only two Churches, one the Lutheran Church to which my landlady belongs and which is plush with beauty. They sing choirs. They have an orchestra. They have an organ that blew my tiny mind. I feel rather tiny before its elegance. The other church, one to which my friend’s mother belongs (my friend does not belong to any church) is a simpler affair. It has no choir, no orchestra, no grand organs. It caters to poorer folks and comes forward in a poorer garb.
People, like liquids of different densities, do not mix. The poor do not enter the exemplified style of rich churches. The rich are not usually seen in poor people’s space of worship. The black stay confined to black churches. The Quakers don’t believe in the Catholics. The Lutherans will tell you what is wrong with the Quakers.
They are all Christians and united in Christianity.
You work. Work is worship.
If you like a girl, ask her out.
Rules of dating. # 1 – don’t call her for at least a week after you have told her you like her. If you can help it, don’t call her for two weeks. Don’t let her know you like her. Don’t let her suspect you want to share your precious space with her.
If you like a boy wait till he asks you out. It’s not cool to ask a guy out.
There is sexual equality in America. There are dating sites.
It sucks to be lonely so date. Date date date till you find your partner.
Don’t live with your parents. It’s not cool.
Be cultured. Like art, like poetry.
Be cool.
Suburbians look down upon city dwellers.
City dwellers think suburbians are snobbish.
There is an attitude towards community college students.
Private colleges have airs.
There are neighborhoods one should not enter.
Different societies in colleges : * Indian Student Association, African Student Association, Jewish Forum, Hispanic…
Indians love fair skins. They dislike Africans.
A major part of the African population is uneducated. They cannot stand the snobbish air these ultra educated Indians wear.
WASP
Red Necks.
FOBs
Liberals watch Fox News.
Republics watch…I don’t know what. Philadelphia is heavily Liberal.
Liberals and Republics never watch each other’s television networks or listen to one another’s radio.
It is impossible for the liberal and the republic to have a real conversation
One half of the population is pretty much a wall for the other half of the population.
A liberal and republic debate in an interesting talk show. They never answer each other’s questions. They only answer and counter answer themselves.
One half of the population has no idea what the other means.
My fiction teacher thinks the poetry department is stupid.
I don’t know what the poetry department thinks. I don’t hang out with the poetry department, not really.
Fiction and poetry do not really mix.
USA is a cauldron where nothing mixes.
Go to China Town. There are only Chinese there.
Catholic Church, the Mormon Church, the Jewish Christian Church, the Orthodox Church, Baptist Church, St John the Evangelist Church, African Methodist Church, Lutheran Church, Quaker Church – Churches, their names, their people. I have entered only two Churches, one the Lutheran Church to which my landlady belongs and which is plush with beauty. They sing choirs. They have an orchestra. They have an organ that blew my tiny mind. I feel rather tiny before its elegance. The other church, one to which my friend’s mother belongs (my friend does not belong to any church) is a simpler affair. It has no choir, no orchestra, no grand organs. It caters to poorer folks and comes forward in a poorer garb.
People, like liquids of different densities, do not mix. The poor do not enter the exemplified style of rich churches. The rich are not usually seen in poor people’s space of worship. The black stay confined to black churches. The Quakers don’t believe in the Catholics. The Lutherans will tell you what is wrong with the Quakers.
They are all Christians and united in Christianity.
You work. Work is worship.
If you like a girl, ask her out.
Rules of dating. # 1 – don’t call her for at least a week after you have told her you like her. If you can help it, don’t call her for two weeks. Don’t let her know you like her. Don’t let her suspect you want to share your precious space with her.
If you like a boy wait till he asks you out. It’s not cool to ask a guy out.
There is sexual equality in America. There are dating sites.
It sucks to be lonely so date. Date date date till you find your partner.
Don’t live with your parents. It’s not cool.
Be cultured. Like art, like poetry.
Be cool.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)