My Notes: The Art of Loving by Erich Fromm

The Art of Loving by Erich Fromm was the book I was looking for for the last few days. Finally, I found a PDF copy of it on Scribd. For the most part,the book deals with theory of love. Following are my notes as I was reading the chapter The Theory of Love from it.

• Love is an art. As it is an art, it needs knowledge and effort for its nourishment.
• The problem of Love is not primarily the problem of being loved, but the problem of loving, of one's capacity to love.  Love is an effort to overcome human separateness.
• Love is an act of giving -- Giving of ourselves, not from ourselves.

 *Basic elements of love: Care, Responsibility, Respect, and Knowledge.

 Care: Active concern for the life and growth of that which we love.

Responsibilty: Not something imposed upon one from outside, but one's response to the needs, expressed and unexpressed, of another human being. To be "responsible" means to be able to and ready to "respond."

Responsibility in case of mother and her infant refers mainly to the care for physical needs. In the love
betwen adults, it refers mainly to the psychic needs of the other person.

Respect: Fromm notes the root of this word is respicere i.e. to look at. Respect is not fear and awe, but the ability to look at the person as he is. He should grow and unfold as he is, not as I need him to be. He should
grow for his own sake, not for the purpose of serving me.

Knowledge: Respect to a person is not possile without knowing him. Knowledge not of periphery, but of core. Fromm elaborates this by example of a person who seems angry to us if we see him superficially, but if we try to know him deeply, we may see he is anxious, and worried; that he feels lonely, that he feels guilty. Then we know that his anger is only the manifestation of something deeper, and we see him as anxious and embarrased, that is as the suffering person, rather than as angry one.

Though, knowledge is not trying to know secrets of man.

Fromm notes, "In the act of loving, of giving myself, I find myself, I discover myself, I discover us both, I discover man."

Finally, though the book deals primarily with the theory of love and oftentimes gets too theoritical, it's a treat to read if we can understand, feel, and apply it to our lives.

A Message from Buddha

Ananda, the favorite disciple of Buddha, having been sent by the Lord on a mission, passed by a well near a village, and seeing Pakati, a girl of Matanga caste, he asked her for water to drink.

Pakati said: “O Brahman, I am too humble and mean to give thee water to drink, do not ask any services of me lest thy holiness be contaminated, for I am of low caste.”

And Ananda replied: “I ask not thee for caste but for water;” and the Matanga girl’s heart leaped joyfully and she gave Ananda to drink.

Ananda thanked her and went away; but she followed him at a distance.

Having heard that Ananda was a disciple of Gotama Sakyamuni, the girl repaired to the Blessed one and cried: “O Lord help me, and let me live in the place where Ananda thy disciple dwells, so that I may see him and minister unto him, for I love Ananda.”

And the Blessed One understood the emotions of her heart and he said: “Pakati, thy heart is full of love, but thou understandest not thine own sentiments. It is not Ananda that thou lovest, but his kindness. Accept, then, the kindness thou hast seen him practise unto thee, and in the humility of thy station practise it unto others.”

I do not know where I stand in this story, but I can see the Buddha telling me “Friend, thy heart is full of love, but thou understandest not thine own sentiments. It is not she that thou lovest, but her kindness.”

Notes:
1. This parable from the life of Buddha is taken from The Gospel of Buddha by Paul Carus.
2. The names here are spelled to match with original Pali names, thus Pakati stands from Prakriti and Gotama for Gautama.
3. Though Pakati calls Ananda as a Brahman, it should be noted that he was a Buddhist monk (Bhikkhu) and not a Brahman.

Separate colonies for Dalits: Is it a solution for the atrocities against them?

On December 6, the death anniversary of Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar, I saw a few people at Deekshabhoomi advocating for separate colonies of the Dalits to prevent caste-based atrocities against them. They held the banner of some Vyavastha Parivartan Manch (forum for change in social system). They were proposing an attractive plan, and however impractical the plan was, there was no one to open a debate and assess the plan from every aspect.


The core argument of the Forum was the incidence of Khairlanji could happen only because the Dalits, to which the Bhotmange family belonged, were minority in that village, and this was the chief reason that the perpetrators could work out their plan. They also held that the incident of Khairlanji was not a unique one, not at least an exception, but the atrocities upon the Dalits by the upper castes are a common scene in the villages of India.

Plan for Separate Colonies of Dalits:
The plan for the separate colonies of the Dalits that they suggested was:

1. Evacuate the Dalit minorities from the villages and settle them in larger colonies of about 5000 people at prominent locations.
2. Provide them with built residences and agrarian land as they held before their re-settlement.
3. Separate police stations, educational institutions, etc. for these colonies run by the Dalits wherever possible.
4. Make constitutional amendments for this plan etc.

My argument:

I strongly oppose this plan, but let me make it clear, before I present my reasons for opposing, that I do not deny the problem. The atrocities against the Dalits are truth. They do happen even 60 years after the commencement of Constitution of India. There is a problem, but the solution that the Forum has provided is not a solution at all.

 

It is a truth that the Dalits are minorities in our villages, but this is not the sole reason of atrocities against them. The reasons are far deep-seated in the socioeconomic and religious arena.

 

Lower socioeconomic status of the Dalits is one of the most important reasons of the atrocities happening against them. The Hindu tradition has always considered them at the lowest level of the social structure. It held them even below the Shudras. Orthodox Hinduism never let the Dalits to get a good social status. This, with several other reasons, led to the largest ever mass conversion in his modern world. But even after the conversion to Buddhism, the Dalits were never allowed to get to the social status that they were looking for. Also with regards to economical status, only a small portion of Dalits could improve itself. A large majority remained the same as they were, save the changes that came with ever-evolving time. The main cause behind this was lack of education.

 

Before going ahead, we should discuss a three-fold reason of lack of education among the Dalits even after conversion to Buddhism.

1. Poverty.
2. Lack of taste for education.
3. Lack of examples in their own group to illustrate benefits of education.

It should be noted that I have noted the third reason specifically because I have noticed several times that Dalit children find no one to look at when they are in their primary and middle schools. They can find not a single example in their own community that would engrave the importance of education on their little minds. They can find no reason why to learn. And what about the well-educated Dalits? They keep away from their own brethren and live in their own world. They establish organizations of themselves, they agitate for their own reasons, and they do everything but assimilate in their own brethren whom they left behind in the villages and urban slums.

 

What’s the solution?

Let’s go to our original problem. What is the solution to the problem of atrocities against the Dalits? I believe that the way is to correct things in a reverse way.

1. Set examples. To set examples, the educated Dalits must mix up with the less-fortunate brethren.
2. By this way, they can create taste for education in them.
3. Education will help to eradicate poverty and improve socioeconomic status of the lower class Dalits in a long run.

Implications of separate colonies:

Separate colonies of Dalits would cause segregation of the Dalits from the Indian society. This is something like asking a ghetto for themselves. The Constitution of India asks its subjects to ensure Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity amongst its citizens. This move would strongly go against the spirit of Fraternity and hence against the sprit of Constitution of India.

 

Summary:

There is a problem and there is a solution, but separate colonies of Dalits is not a solution by any means. Segregation would only deteriorate the problem. Improving socioeconomic status of the Dalits by disseminating education in them and creating of taste for education in them by setting examples is the best way as far as I can see. I do not hold that this is the sole and only solution for this problem. There may be some other aspects that I could not see. I would be happy to learn of them.

 

Memorial by Mahatma Phule to Hunter Commission

November 28! India pays tribute to one of its most significant social revolutionaries, a man from 19th century who pioneered the movement of social revolution in Modern India, Mahatma Jotirao Phule on his death anniversary. A philosopher, educationist, theologian, and an eminent leader of masses, he is precisely termed as Father of Indian Social Revolution. Amongst the variety of roles he played for the betterment of the masses, today we are going to talk about his pioneer role in the educational system in modern India and specifically about the memorial to the Hunter Education Commission by him in 1882.

Background

Since the establishment of its rule, the British East India Company had done almost nothing for education in India till 1813. In 1813, for the first time, the Company arranged some funds for promoting education in India. The medium of education was English. By the year 1855, there were only 1474 educational institutions that were run or aided by the government for the population of 200 million. Only 67,569 student were getting education from these intuitions. Also, here were 1628 Christian missionary schools with about 64,000 students in them. Since the Wood’s Dispatch of 1854 through 1882, the government took some important steps for higher education, but primary education was almost neglected. In the economical year of 1881-82, out of 70,00,000 rupees spent by government on education, only 16,77,000 were spent on primary education. On this background, Lord Rippon appointed an education commission under the chairmanship of William Hunter. This commission reiterated the key points of the Wood’s Dispatch, though it suggested to pay more attention of primary education and education to backward classes.

Memorial by Mahatma Phule to Hunter Commission

The memorial to Hunter Commission by Mahatma Phule is a document of immense importance to understand the educational developments in Modern India. Recorded about a century and a quarter ago, it speaks of some key ideas that are an essential part of modern Indian educational system. He not only speaks of compulsory education to all, but also of creating a taste of knowledge among the backward classes.

In this document, Phule argues that the theory adopted by government that education should go down from the upper classes of society to the masses is nothing but a “utopian” idea. He further goes on to ask for a single example of the truth of this theory. To quote him, the higher classes have “kept their knowledge to themselves, as a personal gift, not be soiled by contact of the ignorant vulgar.” He claims that the educational system has become a monopoly of the higher classes and “if the welfare of the Ryot is at heart, if it is the duty of the Government to check a host of abuses, it behoves them to narrow this monopoly day by day so as to allow a sprinkling of the other castes to get into the public services.”

With regards to compulsory education, he says “I think primary education of the masses should be made compulsory up to a certain age, say at least 12 years.” He notes that the cultivating classes hold aloof of education owing to extreme poverty and also because lack of taste for learning. He asks for special inducements in the form of scholarships, annual prizes, etc. to create in them that taste.

He also notes his observations about the indigenous schools and higher education in this document. However, I do not plan to note it all in the present article. I believe that reading the Memorial in original would be much more beneficial, thus we, the Team of Ghalibana, are posting the original document in PDF form along with this post so that you can save it for yourself or take a print of it and read it thoroughly. This original document, though in public domain, was not available on net till date. We have typed it out ourselves and proofread it twice to avoid any errors from our side. It would be beneficial for both our general readers and scholars to present it in as-it-is form.

We would like to hear from our readers about this project. This is for the first time that we are presenting an original source to our readers. If you find this useful, please let us know. If you have any comments, queries, concerns, or feedbacks, please feel free to leave a note. We love feedbacks.

Once again, our heartiest tribute to that Nobel Soul, Father of Indian Social Revolution, Mahatma Phule.

Click here for the complete document in Google Docs.

Is Hinduism really in danger?

 Over the last couple of days, numerous hoardings have been sprung up on the streets of Nagpur depicting Narendra Maharaj (who is claimed to be Jagadguru, the spiritual mentor of the world, by his followers) proclaiming Hinduism is in danger as it has no state support anywhere in the world (particularly in India). These posters are apparently a part of the bigger agenda of the Hindutva Parivar to polarize the Hindus against the non-Hindus and thus create a vote bank for the Hindu fundamentalist parties. Though such efforts particularly appear to the common man, these also do raise serious questions in the minds of those Indians who are proud of the principal of secularism enshrined in the Constitution of India.
Is Hinduism really in danger? From whom? Left us handle this question a bit systemically. A Hindu state has been a longstanding demand of the Hindutva fundamentalists in India dating back to the early years of the 20th century when V. D. Sawarkar coded the philosophy of Hindutva in his book Hindutva. India, as claimed by the Pariwar, itself is a Hindu nation because of its Hindu majority. But India also has a large population of Muslims too. India has the third largest Muslim population in the world only after Indonesia and Pakistan. As Nobel laureate Amartya Sen has correctly noted, “Too see India just as a country of Hindus is a fairly bizarre idea in the face of that fact alone (the fact of its Muslim population), not to mention the intermingling of Hindus and Muslims in the social and cultural life of India.” Also India has been home to a large number of Christians, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Jews, Parsis, and so on. All these people are Indians by Nationality, and due to this fact, claiming India to be a solely Hindu nation is really a “bizarre India.”

Another aspect of this question is does Hinduism (or any religion for that matter) really needs state support? Indeed, religious have been spread and flourished for ages by state help. State support of Ashoka to Buddhism, of Arabs to Islam, of Romans to Christianity have been helped a lot to spread those religions all over the world in the past. Hinduism had spread to Java and Sumatra with the imperialist kings of South India. But those were the things of past. Is it possible in this age to convert a mass of people from one religion to another by force? Yes, conversions still occur, but there are various reasons behind those and force has little, if any, role to play with it. Religion is supported by its followers. If state has any role to support it, it is secondary. We have seen in the history that religion like Din-e-Ilahi, which was founded by the Akbar, could survive even in his lifetime though it was the regions professed by the emperor himself. And as a matter of fact, Hinduism has survived for ages despite the fact that India has been a subject of various foreign powers for a vast period over this time. This proves that state support is absolutely secondary force in survival and flourishing of any religion. An in a secular state like India, it is absolute unnecessary.

 Let us move towards our main question: Is Hinduism really in danger? It is totally impossible to believe that such an overwhelming majority can be in danger for the minorities. And not merely a majority of numbers, but a majority in every aspect of state – legislation, executive, judiciary, press, military, etc. But this is a less important argument. Hindus are safe not because they are in majority, but because of the multireligious harmony that has been a core part of our Indianness.

Despite the interreligious harmony, conversions do happen in India, and sometimes en masse, but state has nothing to do with it. The Constitution of India has given us a fundamental right to accept and profess a faith of our own choice. What make the people to give up the beloved faith of their ancestors is the most important question . The hostile approach of the upper-class Hinds towards the depressed classes make the poor people to incline towards any love shown by others to them. Many peoples of scheduled tribes have accepted Christianity because of this reason. Another prominent example is of the so-called untouchables who converted to Buddhism en masse, about 400,000, under the able leadership of Dr. Ambedkar. We cannot blame them for their act, because they had been treated rather inhumanly by the Hindus for ages.

The above examples light up the fact that if there is any real danger to Hinduism in a long run, it is from the fundamentalist Hindus themselves who have hijacked the term Hindu for their selfish aims. Their hostility towards their own people and their belligerent attitude towards the others have made a common Hindu to think seriously about his being a Hindu. As Bhalchandra Nemade, a prominent Marathi author, has noted:

"Once Hindu meant all the people living on this side of Sindhu (Indus) River. But now Hindu has become a word in the hands of Hindu fundamentalists, it has been a matter of shame to call yourself a Hindu."

This is not a feeling of Nemade alone. It is a feeling of every common Hindu who is proud of India’s multireligious harmony. To protect our Indianness, the antisecular agenda must be fought against with all of our strength. We are not a Hindu, Muslim, Christan, Buddhist, or Sikh nation – We are Indian at first and Indian from the heart.

To quote Amartya Sen again, “There are good reasons to resist the antisecular enticements... The winter of our discontent might not be giving way at present to a glorious summer, but the political abandonment of secularism would make India more wintry than it currently is.”

*Notes*
1. Sen, Amartya (2005), The Argumentative Indian, “Secularism and Its Discontent”, London: Penguin Books. P. 308
2. Nemade, Bhalchandra, “Reviving the true Hindu Ethos”, An interview with Meena Menon, The Hindu, July 4, 2010.