Moral sense of man is not born out of any religion; of course it helps to give a man’s innate moral sense its flavor. Mother Teresa did it in a different way than Gandhi did. Gandhi’s non violence was born out of the principle of Ahimsa while the Catholic Nun took a leaf out of the New Testament.
2.
Who is worthier the fire-and brimstone preacher like John Calvin or Johnny Appleseed? Didn’t Calvin let torture as a weapon to protect his own authority? Some might argue torture was in accord with the prevailing attitude of that age. ‘Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, today and forever’. God’s words do not change according to fashions of the world. Didn’t Jesus speak thus, ’And whosoever will be chief among you let him be your servant...’Mt.20:27 No wonder what ails Christianity now is the accumulated evil of such hypocritical teachers who misused God’s name for their own selfish gains. The Calvin doctrine may be a theocratic rule but who should apply it but man? Only that bit by bit he loses from whence his authority derives and also whatever moral sense he had in the first place.
Johnny Appleseed, born John Chapman (September 26, 1774 – February 18, 1845), was an American pioneer nurseryman who introduced apples to large parts of Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois, mainly Ohio. He became an American legend while still alive, largely because of his kind and generous ways. He was a missionary but that didn’t stop him from making that part of the world a better place with his conservation programmes.(ack:JC ,J.A-wikipedia)
benny
Sunday, 12 October 2008
Tuesday, 30 September 2008
Disraeli And Women etc.,
Dizzy And Women
Disraeli’s attitude towards women was of a semi-platonic semi-amorous, half courtly and half familiar nature. At the end of his life he told Mathew Arnold:You have heard of me ,accused of being a flatterer. It is true.I am a flatterer.I have found it useful. Everyone likes flattery; and when you come to Royalty, you should lay it on with a trowel.”
In flattery also he equally showed his felicity. The queen was fond of him and let him treat her as equal. Once she presented him with her book ‘Leaves From The Journal Of Our Life In The Highlands.’ As Prime Minister one day talking of literature with her he referred thus, ’we, authors ma’m’
2.
The septuagenarian statesman fell in love with Lady Bedford with the same rashness that we associate among the youth, Lady Bedford was fifteen years his junior. Her name was Seline (Gk- moon) and he told her on one occasion, ”It is not the slice of the moon I want-I want all.”
He wrote her over a thousand letters at all sorts of times and places, sometimes twice or thrice a day that he admitted that his life was passed in trying to govern the country and thinking her.
3.
In the 30s Disraeli wrote, ”All my friends who married for love and beauty either beat their wives or live apart from them… I may commit many follies in life but I never intend to marry for love” In 1839 he married a widow Mrs Wyndham Lewis, a heiress and 12 years senior to him. By all counts the marriage proved to be a happy one. Later his wife remarked that ‘Dizzy married me for money, but if he had the chance again he would marry me for love.”
23.
In The House Of The Lords
The House of Lords was generally considered as the grave of eloquence. When someone remarked that Disraeli would find the Lords tame after the Commons, he replied,”I am dead;dead but in the Elysian fields.”
2.
A young peer once asked Disraeli what course of study he had best undertaken to qualify himself of speaking so as to catch the ear of the House of the Lords.
“Have you a graveyard near your house?” asked Dizzy.
“Yes.”
“Then I should recommend you to visit it earl of a morning and practise upon the tombstones”.
Final Days
Disraeli was already ill and as he corrected the proof of his final speech in Parliament,he said wearily, ”I’ll not go down to posterity talking bad grammar”.
As death drew near, Disraeli ravaged by gout and asthma,quipped, ‘ I have suffered much. Had I been a nihilist, I would have confessed all.’
24.
Disraeli and Whistler
So remarkable a man as Disraeli was many artists wanted to paint him. Whistler tried to make him sit for him and used the good office of the American ambassador. Yet Dizzy was not to be moved. Then one day the painter saw him seated at St.James Park lost in thought. Strangely enough Whistler felt shy and timidly introduced himself to the premier and spoke of the people both knew ,referred to his own work and at last said one great object of his life was to paint the most famous statesman of the age; not a sound or a sign from the somewhat sinister figure. At last the lips of the sphinx moved and he said,’Go away, little man, go away.”
Disraeli’s attitude towards women was of a semi-platonic semi-amorous, half courtly and half familiar nature. At the end of his life he told Mathew Arnold:You have heard of me ,accused of being a flatterer. It is true.I am a flatterer.I have found it useful. Everyone likes flattery; and when you come to Royalty, you should lay it on with a trowel.”
In flattery also he equally showed his felicity. The queen was fond of him and let him treat her as equal. Once she presented him with her book ‘Leaves From The Journal Of Our Life In The Highlands.’ As Prime Minister one day talking of literature with her he referred thus, ’we, authors ma’m’
2.
The septuagenarian statesman fell in love with Lady Bedford with the same rashness that we associate among the youth, Lady Bedford was fifteen years his junior. Her name was Seline (Gk- moon) and he told her on one occasion, ”It is not the slice of the moon I want-I want all.”
He wrote her over a thousand letters at all sorts of times and places, sometimes twice or thrice a day that he admitted that his life was passed in trying to govern the country and thinking her.
3.
In the 30s Disraeli wrote, ”All my friends who married for love and beauty either beat their wives or live apart from them… I may commit many follies in life but I never intend to marry for love” In 1839 he married a widow Mrs Wyndham Lewis, a heiress and 12 years senior to him. By all counts the marriage proved to be a happy one. Later his wife remarked that ‘Dizzy married me for money, but if he had the chance again he would marry me for love.”
23.
In The House Of The Lords
The House of Lords was generally considered as the grave of eloquence. When someone remarked that Disraeli would find the Lords tame after the Commons, he replied,”I am dead;dead but in the Elysian fields.”
2.
A young peer once asked Disraeli what course of study he had best undertaken to qualify himself of speaking so as to catch the ear of the House of the Lords.
“Have you a graveyard near your house?” asked Dizzy.
“Yes.”
“Then I should recommend you to visit it earl of a morning and practise upon the tombstones”.
Final Days
Disraeli was already ill and as he corrected the proof of his final speech in Parliament,he said wearily, ”I’ll not go down to posterity talking bad grammar”.
As death drew near, Disraeli ravaged by gout and asthma,quipped, ‘ I have suffered much. Had I been a nihilist, I would have confessed all.’
24.
Disraeli and Whistler
So remarkable a man as Disraeli was many artists wanted to paint him. Whistler tried to make him sit for him and used the good office of the American ambassador. Yet Dizzy was not to be moved. Then one day the painter saw him seated at St.James Park lost in thought. Strangely enough Whistler felt shy and timidly introduced himself to the premier and spoke of the people both knew ,referred to his own work and at last said one great object of his life was to paint the most famous statesman of the age; not a sound or a sign from the somewhat sinister figure. At last the lips of the sphinx moved and he said,’Go away, little man, go away.”
Sunday, 28 September 2008
Chance vs Certainty
In my impressionable years one man who caught the attention of media was Dr. Albert Schweitzer of Lambarene.
The young Albert once got into a fight and knocked down his opponent. The boy told Albert that it would have ended differently had he been as well nourished as he was. It must have touched him deeply that later in the evening when he came to sup with the family he left his soup untouched. What the boy had said still rankled.
He was privileged while the other was underprivileged.
This revelation marked a definite break with his past and so did his sense of values. He became a caring person.
Even where he excelled in his intellectual achievements they were to be used in service of others. At 26 he had a triple Ph.D.
Whenever Dr. Schweitzer needed money during his stint in Africa he went on tour and gave concerts and talks. But what connects the son of a Lutheran pastor in upper Alsace to Congo?
As a child Albert had often wondered at a statue of a Negro, strong in body but head bowed and in chains. It made an impact on him. Of course the fight was the catalyst. It spurred him to refer to his memory, his past experience to take cues. (One cannot discount the role of chance. But what is chance to any one who is mindful of living with time distorted before him or her.) He knew Time was of the essence.
Against the reality of Time chance is a reminder to straighten out his or her attitude to time. Certainty is ‘chance’ set into right perspective.
2.
What made him decide to become a medical Missionary was due to a Paris Missionary society report, which he came across as if by chance. Thereupon he settled for Lambarene, in the heart of Africa. Where mind of man is colored by collective memory and of Time, chance must, so it seems to me, lose some of its mystery.
benny
The young Albert once got into a fight and knocked down his opponent. The boy told Albert that it would have ended differently had he been as well nourished as he was. It must have touched him deeply that later in the evening when he came to sup with the family he left his soup untouched. What the boy had said still rankled.
He was privileged while the other was underprivileged.
This revelation marked a definite break with his past and so did his sense of values. He became a caring person.
Even where he excelled in his intellectual achievements they were to be used in service of others. At 26 he had a triple Ph.D.
Whenever Dr. Schweitzer needed money during his stint in Africa he went on tour and gave concerts and talks. But what connects the son of a Lutheran pastor in upper Alsace to Congo?
As a child Albert had often wondered at a statue of a Negro, strong in body but head bowed and in chains. It made an impact on him. Of course the fight was the catalyst. It spurred him to refer to his memory, his past experience to take cues. (One cannot discount the role of chance. But what is chance to any one who is mindful of living with time distorted before him or her.) He knew Time was of the essence.
Against the reality of Time chance is a reminder to straighten out his or her attitude to time. Certainty is ‘chance’ set into right perspective.
2.
What made him decide to become a medical Missionary was due to a Paris Missionary society report, which he came across as if by chance. Thereupon he settled for Lambarene, in the heart of Africa. Where mind of man is colored by collective memory and of Time, chance must, so it seems to me, lose some of its mystery.
benny
Straightening Out Time
Time is of a vast scale and beyond our clear understanding. Nevertheless we walk the line or mark time here on the earth. Why would we then correct ourselves of mistakes we perceive them as unworthy of us if it were not so? Anyone who has some measure of self-esteem and respect for one’s true worth will strive to live in an exemplary manner. ‘When can I do better nothing less would suffice’. Time for us on the earth is to take us a notch higher day after day in moral terms as well as in our knowledge . Our mortal nature recognizes truth of nature ; but it is in context of Truth. We have a physical body but we have a soul: our soul is what we hold as Truth transcribed into human terms. Conscience is merely our recognition of it.
2.
St. Augustine led a dissolute life and he changed when he was convicted of such a life unworthy of him. Why would he want to do that when time is distorted for all? Yes we are finite beings and time runs for us in such a manner we tend to be distracted by superficials than by what is of our essence. For St. Augustine such a realization came from a chance hearing of verses from the Scriptures. His mother’s prayers that he would have heard often and the maternal concern for his soul resonated at the appropriate time to effect a change of ways.
Such changes work for so many in so many ways. I shall illustrate in another post how Albert Schweitzer found his way out.
Dr. Albert Schweitzer, St. Francis, Buddha and Gandhi for example learned to straighten out time from distorting their life’s work.
Benny
2.
St. Augustine led a dissolute life and he changed when he was convicted of such a life unworthy of him. Why would he want to do that when time is distorted for all? Yes we are finite beings and time runs for us in such a manner we tend to be distracted by superficials than by what is of our essence. For St. Augustine such a realization came from a chance hearing of verses from the Scriptures. His mother’s prayers that he would have heard often and the maternal concern for his soul resonated at the appropriate time to effect a change of ways.
Such changes work for so many in so many ways. I shall illustrate in another post how Albert Schweitzer found his way out.
Dr. Albert Schweitzer, St. Francis, Buddha and Gandhi for example learned to straighten out time from distorting their life’s work.
Benny
Friday, 26 September 2008
Disraeli-4
15.
It would hardly be conceivable in British Parliamentary history that two personalities so diametrically opposed to one another as Disraeli and Gladstone could also represent two opposing ideologies at the same time. William Ewart Gladstone was the leader of opposition when Disraeli represented the Tories. Gladstone who changed opinions whenever it suited him came to represent the highest political morality while Disraeli who after he had found his party stuck to it all his life, was regarded as a man of few scruples. It was ironic that Dizzy should for his oriental outlook,and because of his race, be treated with distrust. In his opponent everything irrational and impulsive in the English people found home, which he could express with the religious emotionalism and a high moral tone that his supporters found very English. In short he represented qualities that Disraeli despised.
To Disraeli politics was a question of expedience whereas with Gladstone was a matter of morality and he could delude himself his was the voice of justice and truth. He played the politics as a demogogue combined with a missionary zeal that Dizzy thought he was mad; while his opponent thought Dizzy was a devil.
Gladstone carried common qualities on such a vast scale and without imagination and humor, the public saw in him a political prophet of his times. He was a humbug and not above stooping to underhand methods if it helped. As Henry Labouchere, M.P remarked,”I don’t object to (him) always having the ace of trumps up his sleeve but merely to his belief that God Almighty put it there.”
16.
Once Disraeli feeling indisposed got up from his seat in the Treasury office saying to his secretary,”Don’t bother me with the routine work. Please attend to all of it yourself.”He walked towards the door and opened it. “But of course if there is any really important decision to be made..”he paused and seconds before closing it behind he added,”...make it.”
17.
A M.P who had been offered a knighthood did not feel easy and he consulted Dizzy who advised him to accept it but tell everyone that he had refused it.
“Why?”
“Because you get all the credit of having rejected it until you recieve it.”
“And then?”
“You will get all the glory of receiving it after having rejected it.”
18.
While engaged in talk with some cronies he at one point said that he could not remember the pub which came up in discussion. The ‘King’s Arms’ at Berkhamstead it was.
One recalled a barmaid who was a very handsome and a jolly girl. ”You must have been in the ‘King’s Arms’ one insisted.
“Perhaps if I had been in her arms I might have remembered it.”Dizzy answered.
19.
In The House
His complete control of the entire House while in opposition and in power, no one else in his day or before equalled- possibly with the exception of Chatham, was due to his ability to take its pulse and respond to it. Towards this he was always present on the House and was prepared. He knew the subject of debate and had an astonishing memory for facts that he did not have to rely on notes.
He always entered the chamber some five or ten minutes before the proceedings began and he had a solemn air combined with easy confidence. He walked up slowly on the whole length of the floor and when he reached the corner of the table he made a low bow to the Chair. Many M.P’s have found this ceremony painful and feeling self-conscious often have tried to duck it as far as possible. But Disraeli thought it was a necessary duty, a courtly recognition of the supremacy of the Chair.
20. Dizzy’s physical appearance and immobility added much to his authority. He sat with rigid head and body gazing vacantly into space, his arms folded across his breast, his hat slightly tilted over his brows, one knee crossing the other. No one in the House heard him laugh or smile; his usual expression when speaking was one of patient stoicism tinged with melancholy. His impassivity bordering on a catatonic state often infuriated his opponents whose diatribes seemed to go past him. But no one could have administered a snub with more telling effect than he but even that was done in a manner that delighted everyone except the one at the recieving end.
21.
His preeminence in parliament was mainly due to his genius as a speaker, not an orator in the manner of Gladstone or Edmund Burke. He had none of the tricks of their trade. He was fully calm and in control of his emotions and spoke without slurring his words clear and low, more as a man of the world. Standing with his hands on his hips or his thumbs in the armholes of his waistcoat he spoke in a consistent manner using no emphasis. This supercilious and even tenor in his voice was the result of careful training and it contrasted immeasurably when he wished to make a point. Suddenly he became animated, the tone in his voice changed, an ironic note crept in, the words were enunciated with more care and distinctness; A slight shrug, a quick glance, a fleeting expression of that sallow face drew bated breath from his hearers. They knew what was to follow. It came with an unerring aim and made some gasp and break up the stillness of the House with resounding cheers. He took no notice of the cheers as if he was above such display and continued with his speech as before.
He indulged little in gestures depending entirely on his voice to achieve its effect.
compiler:benny
It would hardly be conceivable in British Parliamentary history that two personalities so diametrically opposed to one another as Disraeli and Gladstone could also represent two opposing ideologies at the same time. William Ewart Gladstone was the leader of opposition when Disraeli represented the Tories. Gladstone who changed opinions whenever it suited him came to represent the highest political morality while Disraeli who after he had found his party stuck to it all his life, was regarded as a man of few scruples. It was ironic that Dizzy should for his oriental outlook,and because of his race, be treated with distrust. In his opponent everything irrational and impulsive in the English people found home, which he could express with the religious emotionalism and a high moral tone that his supporters found very English. In short he represented qualities that Disraeli despised.
To Disraeli politics was a question of expedience whereas with Gladstone was a matter of morality and he could delude himself his was the voice of justice and truth. He played the politics as a demogogue combined with a missionary zeal that Dizzy thought he was mad; while his opponent thought Dizzy was a devil.
Gladstone carried common qualities on such a vast scale and without imagination and humor, the public saw in him a political prophet of his times. He was a humbug and not above stooping to underhand methods if it helped. As Henry Labouchere, M.P remarked,”I don’t object to (him) always having the ace of trumps up his sleeve but merely to his belief that God Almighty put it there.”
16.
Once Disraeli feeling indisposed got up from his seat in the Treasury office saying to his secretary,”Don’t bother me with the routine work. Please attend to all of it yourself.”He walked towards the door and opened it. “But of course if there is any really important decision to be made..”he paused and seconds before closing it behind he added,”...make it.”
17.
A M.P who had been offered a knighthood did not feel easy and he consulted Dizzy who advised him to accept it but tell everyone that he had refused it.
“Why?”
“Because you get all the credit of having rejected it until you recieve it.”
“And then?”
“You will get all the glory of receiving it after having rejected it.”
18.
While engaged in talk with some cronies he at one point said that he could not remember the pub which came up in discussion. The ‘King’s Arms’ at Berkhamstead it was.
One recalled a barmaid who was a very handsome and a jolly girl. ”You must have been in the ‘King’s Arms’ one insisted.
“Perhaps if I had been in her arms I might have remembered it.”Dizzy answered.
19.
In The House
His complete control of the entire House while in opposition and in power, no one else in his day or before equalled- possibly with the exception of Chatham, was due to his ability to take its pulse and respond to it. Towards this he was always present on the House and was prepared. He knew the subject of debate and had an astonishing memory for facts that he did not have to rely on notes.
He always entered the chamber some five or ten minutes before the proceedings began and he had a solemn air combined with easy confidence. He walked up slowly on the whole length of the floor and when he reached the corner of the table he made a low bow to the Chair. Many M.P’s have found this ceremony painful and feeling self-conscious often have tried to duck it as far as possible. But Disraeli thought it was a necessary duty, a courtly recognition of the supremacy of the Chair.
20. Dizzy’s physical appearance and immobility added much to his authority. He sat with rigid head and body gazing vacantly into space, his arms folded across his breast, his hat slightly tilted over his brows, one knee crossing the other. No one in the House heard him laugh or smile; his usual expression when speaking was one of patient stoicism tinged with melancholy. His impassivity bordering on a catatonic state often infuriated his opponents whose diatribes seemed to go past him. But no one could have administered a snub with more telling effect than he but even that was done in a manner that delighted everyone except the one at the recieving end.
21.
His preeminence in parliament was mainly due to his genius as a speaker, not an orator in the manner of Gladstone or Edmund Burke. He had none of the tricks of their trade. He was fully calm and in control of his emotions and spoke without slurring his words clear and low, more as a man of the world. Standing with his hands on his hips or his thumbs in the armholes of his waistcoat he spoke in a consistent manner using no emphasis. This supercilious and even tenor in his voice was the result of careful training and it contrasted immeasurably when he wished to make a point. Suddenly he became animated, the tone in his voice changed, an ironic note crept in, the words were enunciated with more care and distinctness; A slight shrug, a quick glance, a fleeting expression of that sallow face drew bated breath from his hearers. They knew what was to follow. It came with an unerring aim and made some gasp and break up the stillness of the House with resounding cheers. He took no notice of the cheers as if he was above such display and continued with his speech as before.
He indulged little in gestures depending entirely on his voice to achieve its effect.
compiler:benny
Thursday, 25 September 2008
Is God Out There?
An individual molecule of water can spend 200,000 years undisturbed in an icesheet in Antartica whereas in the ocean it may spend some 40,000 years. The same molecule can manage 1000 years in an underground reservoir, 10 years in a lake,10 days in the atmosphere. The same molecule in an animal’s body will endure only around 10 hours. With such a variation for the same molecule depending on the state it finds itself we may apply our own case to the concept of Time. Man as terrestrial being may have life span of 80 years or about. As spiritual beings it may have another cycle. What comes after that is beyond any man’s guess.
Time is in short distorted for all corporeal beings.
God is defined as eternal being and omnipresent. If God is a reality, a molecule of water in a great icesheet in Antartica is no different than one in a human body.
In my case I believe God is part and parcel of my being since I mark time. ‘The Kingdom of God is within you’.
benny
Time is in short distorted for all corporeal beings.
God is defined as eternal being and omnipresent. If God is a reality, a molecule of water in a great icesheet in Antartica is no different than one in a human body.
In my case I believe God is part and parcel of my being since I mark time. ‘The Kingdom of God is within you’.
benny
Wednesday, 24 September 2008
Disraeli-3
10.
Sometimes political hostility took on more personal forms. One jibed at him that his wife had picked him out of the gutter. His reply was a model of incisive wit delivered in his customary cool and unflappable composure. Dizzy replied,”My dear fellow, if you were in the gutter nobody would pick you out”.
11.
His power of ridicule when given a cause was superb and he could floor anyone whether in the House or outside with a verbal thrust. By nature he was genial and never went out to aggravate the feeling of those whom he disliked. Once in the House he chose to ignore a vicious attack of one whom despised with an excuse,”I have given him the mercy of my silence.”
12.
His sudden surges of eloquence which amazed people who he met before he became a power in politics is scarcely ever heard now. By the time his ascendency over his party was complete he had fixed in place the persona that characterised him henceforth: calm dignified and sphinx-like. Only his flashing eyes gave life to the face;his talk being measured, grave epigrammatic and delivered in a deep equable tone.
He was a master of prose and in his lifetime his novels were much talked about. He was also a master of verbal duel in which he never chopped where he could slice with his nimble wit.
13.
None of his novels area work of genius but they are the works of a genius. He had the poetic temperament without the poetic talents. His novels are so many attempts to reveal his feelings in his evolutions as a statesman. Lack of flesh and blood in his characters were to a certain extent saved by his coruscating wit.He once wrote:’ Nobody should ever look anxious except those who have no anxiety.”
14.
In his twilight years, whenever his illness and his duties permitted,Dizzy continued to dine out and deliver some deathless quips. Once when he was asked whether he read a novel that was making a stir, the author of Vivien Grey, Alroy, Coningsby, Lothair and Sybil replied,” When I want to read a novel I write one.”
compiler:benny
Sometimes political hostility took on more personal forms. One jibed at him that his wife had picked him out of the gutter. His reply was a model of incisive wit delivered in his customary cool and unflappable composure. Dizzy replied,”My dear fellow, if you were in the gutter nobody would pick you out”.
11.
His power of ridicule when given a cause was superb and he could floor anyone whether in the House or outside with a verbal thrust. By nature he was genial and never went out to aggravate the feeling of those whom he disliked. Once in the House he chose to ignore a vicious attack of one whom despised with an excuse,”I have given him the mercy of my silence.”
12.
His sudden surges of eloquence which amazed people who he met before he became a power in politics is scarcely ever heard now. By the time his ascendency over his party was complete he had fixed in place the persona that characterised him henceforth: calm dignified and sphinx-like. Only his flashing eyes gave life to the face;his talk being measured, grave epigrammatic and delivered in a deep equable tone.
He was a master of prose and in his lifetime his novels were much talked about. He was also a master of verbal duel in which he never chopped where he could slice with his nimble wit.
13.
None of his novels area work of genius but they are the works of a genius. He had the poetic temperament without the poetic talents. His novels are so many attempts to reveal his feelings in his evolutions as a statesman. Lack of flesh and blood in his characters were to a certain extent saved by his coruscating wit.He once wrote:’ Nobody should ever look anxious except those who have no anxiety.”
14.
In his twilight years, whenever his illness and his duties permitted,Dizzy continued to dine out and deliver some deathless quips. Once when he was asked whether he read a novel that was making a stir, the author of Vivien Grey, Alroy, Coningsby, Lothair and Sybil replied,” When I want to read a novel I write one.”
compiler:benny
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)