Stumped - completely.

Last night, I sat working till late. Very late. At about 4:00 as I went off to make coffee, all of a sudden, thoughts about Bahadurshah Zafar just dropped into my head. That's the only way I can describe it. Usually we say that a thought popped out of the head. But the feeling that this thing dropped "into" my head was just too distinct. No confusion there. I walked back reinforced with the coffee and decided to read the Wikipedia page on Bahadurshah. I also heard his immortal ghazal "लगता नही है दिल मेरा उजड़े दयार में". Out of the long and detailed Wiki page, only two sentences stayed in my head. In fact, only two words out of those. The sentence was -
Bahadur Shah died in exile on 7 November 1862. He was buried near the Shwedagon Pagoda in Yangon, at the site that later became known as Bahadur Shah Zafar Dargah.
And the two words that I refer to were SHWEDAGON PAGODA. There was just something in the way the words sounded. At least I imagined it that way.
All this took five minutes and then I was back to work. Before I realized, it was past 6 and the newpaper boy's footsteps made me get up. As I opened the Pune DNA, my eyes fell on THIS piece. Right at the top of the first page.

After Cadbury's - Havells follows suit?

Some days ago, I wrote about Cadbury's TV ads going from bad to worse. over the years. Now another company which had caught people's attention with their catchy ads seems to be going the same way. I am referring to Havells of course.

The ad I am talking about is doing its rounds on TV currently. I am sure you have all seen it, but just in case, here's the summary.

A hangman 'delivers' the criminal to the noose and walks back distraught to his home. As he enters his dark home, he switches on the light and the voice over says "जिंदगी में हम सबको पाप करना पड़ता है, तो क्योँ ना पुण्य कमा ले ... बिजली बचा के. Havells CFL ज्यादा बिजली बचाए." We all have to commit sins in our lives. So why not also do a good deed. By saving electricity. Havells saves power etc etc etc.

I am quite stumped by this ad. I do understand the need to save power and am all for it. Really. ALL the lamps in my home are CFL. Its another matter that they are not Havells! 

Is it really necessary to twist this issue to such extent to make people understand it only in the light of (sorry, pun not intended) sin and virtue and morality and all that? The chasm between sin and virtue in the ad is far too stretched, I think. On a silly note, are they saying that the hangman won't feel guilty pulling the lever once he has fitted  his home with CFL lamps? It's somewhat like bathing in the Ganga once a year. Commit all the sins that you want to for 364 days, then visit Hardwar once.

On a parallel note, there is a strange link between this issue and my earlier posts about punishment. Particularly death sentence. Does the hangman really commit a sin, or is he doing his duty? I can understand what a hangman must feel like. No matter how duty-bound one is, it surely must not be easy to pull the plug on someone else's life.

Be that as it may, please convert from using conventional bulbs to CFL if you haven't already done so. It makes sense. Sins or no sins.

For the inquisitive ones, the ad has been made by Lowe Lintas.

The punishment of living.

The comments on my earlier post have led me to think more on this line and am presenting a rather queer thought. I am probably contradicting myself as compared to the earlier post. (Which is OK. I often contradict myself!) Further, I might be raising a storm with this thought.
The issue is about what is the purpose of law, justice and punishment. And specifically with reference to a terrorist, whether ANY punishment really achieves a purpose at all.
Just last night, our usual gang (which means Swati, Vallarie, Prasad and Mamata) met up at my place and late in the night the discussion veered towards Ashvatthama. The curious character from Mahabharat. Krishna 'cursed' him with immortality for his evil deeds (which were too many to recount here. Suffice to say that he committed heinous crimes, equivalent to a terror attack in today's times.) In Hindu mythology, there are eight characters who are considered to be 'chiranjeev', that is immortal. These include Parshuram, Vibheeshan, Hanuman and others. Out of these eight, seven were granted the boon of immortality owing to their good deeds. Only one, Ashvatthama, was CURSED with immortality. How does one explain this seeming contradiction?

Nobody wants to die. I am assuming of course, but I think its a safe assumption. Scores of people have spent their lifetimes trying to find the way to avoid, feign or hoodwink death. And an equal number of people have considered the search to be futile. As Albus Dumbledore tells Harry Potter a truth of life - "After all, to a well-organized mind, death is but the next great adventure." I am no expert on world's religions, but I know enough Hinduism to know that it teaches us to consider death as a comma and not a fullstop. And in being a comma, it releases one from the trials and tribulation of life and living. Suffering, I mean.
So back to Mahabharat. Even Bhishma the great warrior was granted a boon that he could choose the time of his death. So hypothetically, he could have lived forever if he wanted to. He didn't. He chose the time when he was ready for the 'next great adventure', so to say. But Ashvatthama was cursed by Krishna - he was told that he won't die and thus be able to face the judgement for his sins. He would continue to live and roam the earth forever, burning in the shame and guilt of his deeds. The most horrible curse if you see it from the Hindu point of view. Imagine being told that you will never ever get a release.
What am I saying, then? Is keeping a terrorist alive a worse punishment than hanging? The Islamic fundamentalist view also compels a terrorist to seek heaven through death, so he/she is not afraid of going and committing the act of terror. On the contrary, he is quite sure of what he is doing, to reserve a berth in heaven. So is it a better idea to deny him that berth?
I have no answers, just presenting my confusion in its most raw form.
On a tangential note, this is my 100th blog post!!! I am glad that it is a thoughtful topic. The other topic I had in mind was Mayawati's garland. Ugh. She can wait for some time.

David Headley - Justice denied, mocked at, or negotiated?

I hear on the news that David Headley has pleaded guilty on all the 12 charges against him. He did so after being assured that he would not be given the death penalty, nor would he be extradited to India. So what happens next? I suppose he will get a sentence for 186 years or some such thing. The US attorney general has said - "not only has the criminal justice system achieved a guilty plea in this case, but David Headley is now providing us valuable intelligence about terrorist activities. As this case demonstrates, we must continue to use every tool available to defeat terrorism both at home and abroad."

OK, I see the point. But I cant ignore the irony that such confessions have to be bargained and negotiated for, against a promise of deferring the death sentence. I am not debating on whether death penalty should exist or not. That's a separate debate altogether. I am distressed by the thought - doesn't this give the convict an escape route?

It is yet another debatable issue that if Headley had actually been extradited to India, would he have been convicted (and convicted quickly enough) to be punished. Going by the way Kasab's trial is progressing, Headley would have probably spent several years shuttling between court and custody. So - does this trial solve anything? As far as healing the wounds of 26/11 victims, no punishment to either Kasab or Headley will ever be enough. The scars are permanent. Which brings me to a question that has bothered me for years.

What is the purpose of a punishment? I am thinking of different options and just checking if the Headley case has achieved any.

To undo the wrongdoing that the convict had done upon the victim? - No. I doubt if that can be achieved in this case, going by the enormity of his crimes.

To reform a criminal and get him back to become a good citizen? VERY unlikely in this case. Don't forget that Headley has already spent two years in US prison in 1998 when he was arrested for drug-trafficking. So the punishment appears to have done nothing to reform him. If at all, it just made him an even more dangerous person.

To serve as a warning for others who might be plotting a similar heinous act? I would hardly imagine that to happen. If potential assasins were going to worry about being hanged, no assasination would have taken place in India after Nathuram Godse was hanged.

I am still searching for the answer. what is the purpose of a punishment?