nAlO nEnu (Is literature the ultimate? #3)
Prabhakar Vissavajjhala (vissa@cortex.neuro.mssm.edu)
Tue, 10 Jun 1997 21:46:11 -0500
nAlO nEnu
(Is poetry the ultimate regarding the practical reality? #3)
[This is put in the form of a dialogue between 'manassu' (mind) abbreviated
as 'M' and 'buddhi' (conscience) abbreviated as 'B' of the same
individuval.]
M: Well, I guess people do know that the 4th category are important and
the ultimate anyway. But do you think that there is no significance for the
3rd category? Aren't they better than the 2nd category, if not the best? By
the way, where do you put the poets/writers, who generate the 'beeja' in
your new format of the story? Which category do they belong to?
B: One question at a time, please. The poets/writers belong to the
'distinguished 3rd category' of our story.
M: What?! Are you crazy? You put both the people who read
literature/poetry and the poets/writers, who produce it also in the same
category? By the way, do you know who is a poet/writer?
B: Come on. You already said that, didn't you? But you have not elaborated
about the 'unique vision' he/she will or should have. This vision
supposedly should be like of a 'judge' rather than of a 'lawyer', who
argues for only one side of the issue. This is like he/she standing at the
center point of a circle and could visualize all around that. If he/she
just confines to only one angle, or one sector; justice may not be done.
Indeed, I personally feel, rather than a circular vision, a spherical
vision is the best, if one can. Such a person can visualize every possible
variation of the states of all the creatures and where they fit in the
sphere around an issue, which is the center point. I feel the circular
vision confines to one's own era or time and the spherical one could be
about all the times. That is what is 'satyAnvEshaNa' or 'samagra darSana'.
Remember, an authentic poet/writer never stops this process and this keeps
burning in him/her. They keep on assimilating (not accumulating)
things/knowledge relentlessly.
M: How one can realize that the 'anvEshaNa' has reached the peak or
perfection, regarding an issue? And what is the proof for that?
B: I liked your question, buddy! You are getting into the track. I liked
one of Sree 'koDavaganTi kuTumba rAv's quotation. I may not be very
accurate up to every word, but certainly I am not missing the essence. It
is 'manishiki antarAtmani mincina nyAyasthAnam lEdu. adE
paramAvadhi analEka pOyinA; anta kanTE gatyantaram lEdu'.
M: That is a superb one, indeed.
B: Isn't it? I love it for its sheer truthful beauty. Guess, why he would
have said that 'adE paramAvadhi analEka pOyinA....'? Because you never
know whether you are perfect or not. There can never be any proof for this.
There can never be any yard stick for this. By the simplest logic, nobody
is a 'sarvaj~na' about an issue. So, there is a possibility of anybody may
be ignorant of something. So, if this feeling gets transformed into
'jign~Asa', that individual marches forward in exploring the truth to one's
own capability. More the knowledge, more the exploratory capacity for that
individuval. But if one feels satisfied with short-sightedness, or
one-angle/unilateral vision, or arrogance and thinks one knows a thing
quite well or what one knows is enough, it may lead to 'jigeesha'.
M: What is the difference between 'jign~Asa' and 'jigeesha'?
B: 'jij~nAsa' is the desire to learn; whereas 'jigeesha' is the desire to win.
M: How and why does this difference occur in your opinion?
B: The former is due to the awareness of one's own limitations; whreas the
latter is due to the ingnorance and/or arrogance generated due to momentary
lapse of wisdom forgetting one's own limitations. Probably, this is why
people say 'half knowledge is dangerous'. There is a great vEmana's poem to
substantiate this further.
Adi kAraNamula alpuDeruga DepuDu
ceppa lEDu gAni tappu baTTu
trOya nErcu kukka dontara pErcunA?
M: O.K.
B: Due to this, the poet/writer belongs to the 'distinguished category'
but to the 3rd category of our story. Afterall, the poet is the first
'audience' of his/her poetry. After delivering poetry/writings; he/she
completes the role of 'distinction' and becomes like any other common
person for the sake of 'practical reality'. So, the poet/writer inspite of
generating the 'stone', is considered to have thrown it into his/her ear
also. So, unless they too act accordingly, when it has implementable value,
they don't belong to the 4th category. This is the reason I put
poets/writers in the 'distinguished 3rd category' of my story.
M: O.K. But, I have an important and serious question. Is it necessary
that the poet should follow what he/she says? Should one lead by example?
Is that possible or essential on every occasion; especially, while dealing
with the 'practical reality'?
(to be continued)
With regards,
Prabhakar Vissavajjhala