Dr. Jernail S. Anand

THE BUILD UP

In ‘The Gita’, Lord Krishna gives us theory of   ‘Karma’, according to which, man has complete authority over his action, but no control over its fall out. In fact, there are three phases of an action. The planning, the action, the reaction. It is very rare that the focus is placed on the areas which precede action. Today, I wish to focus on this region of human thought which leads to action.

How we decide upon an action? ‘Karma’ theory in fact places the entire responsibility on man. He has a discerning mind which is always at work. It is this mind which finally comes to a conclusion which leads to action. What are the components of the process of human thought? According to Lord Krishna, such decisions are subject to human nature which is determined by ‘Sattva’, ‘Rajasa’ and ‘Tamsa’, the three ‘gunas’ which determine the nature of man, according to which he acts.  In this way, the responsibility falls on man, after all he has been given a free will, and it is his decision how he reacts to a given situation.

It is said that it is human actions which make history. In our lives, we move forward only when we act. In a way, at first we think and decide, and then take an action. It can be said that every action is taken to satisfy an enquiry. Some question remains to be answered. Some question which needs physical reaction.

It may be going too far in complex reasoning but I can hazard to say that there is no action, only reaction.

What we call our action which, should represent our duty, is in fact our reaction to a situation. How much we understand that build-up of emotions, reasons and feelings? Is our understanding of these forces correct? We can be over reacting to the stimuli. Is it right to act? And is it right to keep silent, and let things happen? These are our conscious decisions taken after a lot of scanning within our mind. In fact, there is a situation brewing. And, this situation demands our reaction. So, our action in response to that emotional build up is our reaction to that situation.

We can call it action.

Lord Krishna now says once you have acted, you have no control over the fall out. The reason behind this assertion seems to be that like text, your action is also open to a multiple of interpretations and appreciations. A thousand people will respond in thousand and one ways. And it is not in your hands to limit the reverberations of your actions. Our voice affects the cosmos which appears to be silent. Our actions create, not reactions, but deep vibrations, which are seismographic in nature.

The Build-Up

Whatever man does, who is behind his actions? If his fate is pre-written, and things are just revealed as he moves forward, it means, his actions too are predestined. How far is he responsible for his actions? According to Karma theory, there are two things which lead man to decide upon an action: his nature and the divine that sits within his heart. Whenever we do something wrong, if we know it is wrong, it means there is some mechanism within us which tells us what is right and what is wrong. That inbuilt mechanism is the divine, seated in our hearts, where our motives are tested. Now, it depends on the nature of man, the ‘gunas’ of ‘rajas’ and ‘tamsa’, which over power the ‘sattva’ element, and force him towards evil. Lord Krishna wants man to control his mind, through ‘Karma yoga’.

Conclusion

I think the idea of action is fundamentally fluid and unstable. Actually, there is no action, only reaction, to an emerging situation. If at all any action takes place, it is in the mind of man, where chemicals get into an operational warfare, supporting or opposing a line of action.

Read: Man is never an individual entity

_________________

Dr. Jernail Singh Anand, based in Chandigarh, is an Indian poet and scholar credited with 170 plus books of English literature, philosophy and spirituality. He won great Serbian Award Charter of Morava and his name adorns the Poets’ Rock in Serbia. He was honored with Seneca Award LAUDIS CHARTA by Academy of Arts & Philosophical Sciences, Bari, Italy 2024. He is Founder President of the International Academy of Ethics and conferred Doctor of Philosophy (Honoris Causa) by University of Engineering & Management, (UEM) Jaipur. Email anandjs55@yahoo.com 

The post Cause and Effect — A New Dance first appeared on Sindh Courier.

By Noor Muhammad Marri, Advocate | Islamabad

The ancient philosopher Heraclitus once said, “War is the father of all.” Centuries have passed, yet human history still appears to move under the shadow of this harsh reality. Modern morality may reject war, intellectuals may condemn violence, and religions may preach peace, but the structure of civilization itself often emerged from conflict, conquest, resistance, and consolidation.

Usually people present history in moral language, but history itself moves through power. Empires did not expand through sermons; they expanded through armies. Borders were not drawn by philosophers; they were drawn by victories and defeats. Even civilizations that later became symbols of law, culture, and refinement were born in periods of bloodshed and struggle.

In the subcontinent too, it is often argued that the philosophy of Mahatma Gandhi defeated the United Kingdom. But such explanations ignore the larger global reality. The real turning point was World War II, which exhausted Britain economically, militarily, and psychologically. The empire no longer possessed the strength to maintain direct colonial control over vast territories. Anti-colonial movements certainly played their role, but global power equations had already shifted. History often changes not only because people desire freedom, but because empires lose the capacity to continue domination.

War, however, is only the first phase. After destruction comes consolidation. After conquest comes amalgamation. Civilizations are not created merely by military victories; they are shaped when different cultures, values, traditions, and populations begin interacting under new political realities. Almost every great civilization emerged from this process.

The Mongol conquests began with extraordinary violence, yet they later connected vast regions of Asia and Europe, opening routes for trade, diplomacy, and intellectual exchange. Muslim empires in the subcontinent were not merely military occupations; over centuries they produced blended cultures, languages, architecture, customs, music, and administrative systems. Even modern European nation-states such as Germany and Italy emerged after prolonged wars and political consolidation.

If we carefully observe human history, civilization and interaction among nations often took place under the shadows of swords. The Silk Road flourished because powerful empires secured routes through military authority. Conquest was followed by trade; trade was followed by cultural exchange; and cultural exchange slowly produced new social realities. Armies opened roads, but afterward came scholars, merchants, saints, poets, and craftsmen.

Yet force alone never sustains a civilization. The sword may establish authority, but legitimacy preserves it. Every empire that relied only upon violence ultimately collapsed under its own weight. Durable civilizations emerged where power transformed itself into law, administration, economic integration, and cultural accommodation. History therefore is not merely a story of war, but of what societies build after war.

Modern states still behave according to this old logic, though they hide it beneath sophisticated language such as development, democracy, security, or globalization. Behind many political slogans remains the same struggle for power, influence, resources, and strategic control. Human civilization may speak the language of peace, yet the structure of international politics continues to move through competition and conflict.

Thus, when Heraclitus declared that war is the father of all, he was not glorifying bloodshed alone. He was pointing toward a painful truth about human history: conflict has repeatedly acted as the force that breaks old structures, creates new realities, and pushes societies into transformation. The real question for humanity is not whether conflict exists, but whether mankind can transform the aftermath of conflict into justice, coexistence, and civilization rather than endless domination.

Read: From Divine Kings to People’s Voice

__________________

Noor Muhammad Marri Advocate & Mediator is based in Islamabad

The post The real question for humanity first appeared on Sindh Courier.

Dr. Jernail S. Anand | India

Albert Camus, while discussing the Myth of Sisyphus suggests that “the struggle itself towards the heights is enough to fill a man’s heart. One must imagine Sisyphus happy” suggesting that the struggle is futile, repetitive, and ultimately meaningless, yielding no lasting results, and a man who expects nothing from this struggle is a happy man.

What Camus says may not be the ultimate truth. He is trying to interpret a myth according to his own circumstances, which are time-bound, and he too, is not absolutely a free agent. He is also a by-product of his circumstances. So many of his contemporaries did not think of life the way he thought. Suicide was a highly personal decision.  If that fateful moment had passed, Camus might have lived on, may be to revise his own writings, because, as time passes, we evolve in our perceptions. I find it difficult to agree with Camus that the boulder that he is carrying is the futile tasks which fill his mind, and he is happy that he is busy with these meaningless tasks, i.e. his struggle against nothingness. This is what Camus calls absurd.

The Boulder: The Weary Weight of ‘Karma’

The myth focuses on the rock which Sisyphus is trying to climb, while I think the main issue with the tragic fate of Sisyphus is the boulder. Sisyphus is a representation of Adam, who was also cursed and thrown out of Eden, for reasons too obvious. The trek upwards signifies the spiritual elevation, a reaching out to gods, to heaven. But he rolls down the hill, and starts again. This signifies the various incarnations which man has to live through. The boulder that he is carrying is the collective weight of his ‘Karma’. Our actions are being added to the total mass of our fate, and we carry our cross on our back in the form of the boulder.

When we think of the ‘mass of karma’, it touches on the idea of human history, the dump of good and bad actions, that humanity has done, it has to carry like its cross on its back and move up.   Millions lie dead on the way. The weight proves too heavy, and too unmanageable, but it has to be carried up.  We cannot disown our past, we cannot disown our history. Once an action has been taken, we have to suffer its fall out.  The boulder, it appears, is representing that dump of history, the junk heap of past ‘karma’ which is responsible for throwing our steps out of balance. What adds insult to injury is our passion for the past, in which we always choose to live.  The entire educational world is busy digging the graves. Talking of the past is beneficial only to an extent. But an overdose of history only bamboozles us who represent Sisyphus in modern times.  The boulder that Sisyphus is carrying is the burden of the past, the obsession with history, from which he cannot free himself, and it causes his fall, and he has to start afresh.

Reinventing Sisyphus

Shall we remain trapped in the image of Sisyphus? Is it our final destiny? Is there no evolution of human perception? Is there no other archetype to explain human condition? Mythology can only describe man’s existential status, but it cannot trap it. It is not that we cannot transcend the boundaries set by Greek myths. Men who scripted mythology looked back at what had been, and they wrote about it. If they are brought to life today, and asked to write the story of Sisyphus, the story will never be the same. Thus, what is needed today is Neo mythology which responds to the modern times.

Today, machines, AI will come to Sisyphus’s help, and he would be in a position to scale the rock, fortified by the power of the machines. We think machines are man-made. And therefore, artificial. If men are made by God, then, whatever they create has a godly connect. Machines do not exist outside the atmosphere in which men live. Can a motorbike run without the air, we need to breathe in? So, they are based on the elements which govern our lives too. Only their physics is different. And Gods have evolved their own vision in order to accept people with advanced technology. How could Sisyphus remain immune from the cutting edge of technology? I have no intention to deny what has been held sacred by the myths.  Camus too is right in his own right.  But I hazard a guess here. If Camus were to revisit this world today, in the times of AI, he might revise The Myth of Sisyphus.

Read: Man is never an individual entity

_________________

Dr. Jernail S. Anand, with 200 plus books [19 epics] to his credit, is an authoritative voice in the contemporary world literature. Founding President of the International Academy of Ethics, and Laureate of Charter of Morava [Serbia], Seneca [Italy], Franz Kafka [Germany, Ukraine, Czech Rep], Maxim Gorky [Russia] Soka Ikeda [Japan] and Mahakavi Bharati [India] awards, his name is inscribed on the Poets’ Rock in Serbia. He is an Honorary Member of the Serbian Writers Association, Belgrade, a Member of the Honorary International Boule and Honorary Academic Senator of International Academy of Rome, and an Academic Member of the Academy of Arts and Philosophical Sciences, Bari [Italy]. 

The post Reinventing Sisyphus: Subverting the Myth first appeared on Sindh Courier.

• Nietzsche’s challenge is to ensure that these choices are made consciously, with an awareness of what is gained and what may be lost.

Noor Muhammad Marri Advocate | Islamabad

I share a very important thesis on liberalism and equality, which will create more questions rather than fewer answers. It is not an attempt to settle the debate, but to disturb its comfort, to probe beneath what is often taken for granted, and to expose the tensions hidden within the moral language of modern politics. What appears as a settled truth—that all human beings are equal—may, under closer examination, reveal itself as a historical construct shaped by struggle, power, and interpretation. It is within this spirit of inquiry that one must turn to the unsettling thought of Friedrich Friedrich Nietzsche, who stands not merely as a critic of liberalism, but as a challenger of its very moral foundation.

Nietzsche does not approach liberalism as a political theorist in the conventional sense. He approaches it as a genealogist of morals, questioning not how systems function, but why their underlying values came into being. European liberalism, shaped through the works of John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, rests upon the assumption that all individuals possess equal moral worth. From this assumption flows the entire architecture of modern politics: rights, democracy, and the rule of law. Yet Nietzsche looks at this structure with suspicion. He does not deny its historical success, but he questions its origin and its cost.

The first fracture appears in the idea of natural equality. Nietzsche rejects it outright. For him, life itself is defined by difference. Individuals are not equal in their capacities, their drives, or their potential. Some possess a greater intensity of will, a deeper creativity, a stronger capacity to shape values. Others do not. To impose equality upon such a landscape is, in Nietzsche’s eyes, to deny reality. Liberalism, by insisting on equality, does not recognize difference; it attempts to neutralize it. It constructs a moral order in which hierarchy becomes suspect and excellence must justify itself before the tribunal of the average.

This critique deepens when Nietzsche turns to the origins of morality itself. In On the Genealogy of Morality, he presents the distinction between master morality and slave morality. Master morality arises from those who affirm their own strength and vitality. It is a morality of creation, where values emerge from power and self-confidence. Slave morality, by contrast, arises from those who lack such power. Unable to dominate in the physical or political sense, they turn to the moral realm, redefining values in a way that condemns strength and elevates weakness. What was once considered noble becomes “evil,” and what was once seen as weakness becomes “good.”

It is within this inversion that Nietzsche locates the roots of liberal equality. Equality, in this framework, is not an objective truth but a moral strategy. It is the means through which the weak restrain the strong, ensuring that no individual rises too far above the rest. The language of rights and fairness, which liberalism treats as universal, becomes in Nietzsche’s analysis a historical product of resentment. This does not make it false in a simple sense, but it strips it of its claim to neutrality. It reveals it as an expression of power, albeit a different kind of power—one that operates through moral persuasion rather than physical force.

The political consequences of this moral transformation are most visible in democracy. Nietzsche views democracy with deep skepticism, not because it fails to function, but because of what it promotes. By giving equal weight to all voices, it elevates quantity over quality. The judgment of the many becomes the standard, and the exceptional individual finds himself constrained by the expectations of the majority. In such a system, mediocrity becomes dominant, not because it is superior, but because it is common. Nietzsche fears that this leads to the emergence of what he calls the “last man,” a figure who seeks comfort, security, and equality, but who lacks the ambition and courage that define higher forms of life.

At the center of Nietzsche’s thought is the idea of the Will to Power, which he understands as the fundamental drive of all living beings. This is not merely a desire for domination, but a deeper impulse toward growth, expansion, and self-overcoming. Life, in this sense, is a process of striving, of pushing beyond limits, of creating new values. Equality, however, imposes constraints on this process. By seeking to limit difference and reduce hierarchy, it restrains the very force that drives human development. Liberalism, therefore, appears not as a celebration of life, but as a system that prioritizes stability over vitality, comfort over creativity, and uniformity over excellence.

Yet Nietzsche’s critique does not come without risk. To reject equality is to open the possibility of hierarchy in its most uncompromising form. It raises questions that liberalism seeks to answer but perhaps cannot fully resolve. If individuals are unequal, how should society treat them? Can dignity survive without equality? Does the recognition of difference inevitably lead to domination? Nietzsche does not provide clear answers, and perhaps deliberately so. His purpose is not to construct a new political system, but to expose the assumptions underlying the existing one.

What makes his critique enduring is its ability to unsettle certainty. Liberalism presents equality as self-evident, as a moral truth beyond question. Nietzsche refuses this certainty. He forces us to ask whether equality is a principle grounded in justice or a compromise shaped by historical necessity. He challenges us to consider whether the pursuit of equality may come at the cost of excellence, whether the protection of the many requires the limitation of the few, and whether a society committed to fairness can also cultivate greatness.

These questions do not lead to simple conclusions. They create tension, and it is within this tension that Nietzsche’s thought operates. He does not ask us to abandon equality, but he does ask us to see it differently—to recognize its origins, its functions, and its consequences. In doing so, he transforms the debate over liberalism into a deeper inquiry about the nature of morality itself.

In the end, the strength of Nietzsche’s thesis lies not in providing answers, but in compelling us to confront the complexity of the questions. Liberalism and equality remain powerful and necessary ideas, but they are no longer beyond scrutiny. They must be defended not as unquestionable truths, but as choices—choices that carry both benefits and costs. Nietzsche’s challenge is to ensure that these choices are made consciously, with an awareness of what is gained and what may be lost.

Read: Fragmentation empowers feudal dominance

_______________

Noor Muhammad Marri is an Advocate and Mediator, based in Islamabad

The post Nietzsche Thesis on Liberalism and Equality first appeared on Sindh Courier.

• Looking back at the past is good to put you in a trance, for some time, but if you are young and have a passion for future growth, can you afford to escape into a world which does not exist now?

Dr. Jernail S Anand | India

The human society apparently has two divisions of people. One, who have seen this world and are in the advanced stage of life, and the other, who have just begun the journey.

The older lot want the new lot to be like them, and like things they liked, and they should struggle and learn the joy of hard work and honesty which a way of life in the distant past.  In a way, it is a drag back syndrome. They live in their past, which to them, looks glamorous, for the simple reason that distance lends charm to things. Now, that they have left it behind, even pain has lost its substance. Nothing gives us more feeling of pleasant joy, when you revisit the days of your harder times, which you had to suffer, and which are over now.  And these old timers want to tell these stories of suffering and joy to their younger ones, and wish they gather some guidance from the roads they have mapped.

Look at the routine of a man who has retired from active service. If they are living with their sons and daughters and even grandchildren, they are telling them stories and anecdotes from their own life. We should not forget that two persons, born at the same time, can wear similar clothes, or acquire similar habits, equal weight and equal height, and they may have the same features too, but what no two people can have in common are dreams. They are essentially different from each other and this reality is often overlooked by our old guard.

The Drag back Syndrome

What we call generation gap is actually the result of this drag back syndrome. We want to cling to time, and wish that it does not pass, or if we could draw it back, so that we remain relevant. I have always believed that past is a mental construct. Anything that loses its significance for the present, becomes past. And things which have flung into past, are simply things which had lost relevance for the present. Technically, past means things which have lived their utility and cannot be called back. Wisdom lies in not dragging forth things from the past. The old generation wants the things of their early years to be revived, and those who take interest in ‘their’ past, are considered to possess ‘good taste’.

Love for culture is a common feature of our life. There are departments of Culture in educational institutions which bring up the old times. Culture, thus, simply means you are looking back into the past. And if we keep looking into the past, when shall we move forward, and when shall be plan for the future? No institution has a department for the Future of Mankind. Looking back at the past is good to put you in a trance, for some time, but if you are young and have a passion for future growth, can you afford to escape into a world which does not exist now? No doubt, there was something which was good, and bringing that into focus is quite understandable. But asking them to inculcate those times into their behaviour and thought patterns is putting the cart before the horses.

Academics and the Drag back syndrome

A scholar is an academic, who studies pain like a theory paper. And his solutions too are academic. The ordinary people, with real problems, and persistent suffering, feel lost because scholars write for marks leading to degrees and libraries, and not for solving the problems of ordinary people. Studying life like a discipline is one thing, giving solutions to life’s problems is quite another. The academics look at human problems from a distance. They have nothing to offer to a rickshaw puller whose young daughter goes to college, and feels threatened by goons when she is coming back on a cycle. Neither Jane Austen, nor Dickens can come to their help. Rather than making young scholars work on the Elizabethan times in Chaucer’s work, we need to create literature with a futuristic bias, and address the problems of our present society, and suggest means how it can boldly move into the times ahead. Going back into the past turns you into an academic ivory tower luxuriating in its own light.

A scholar is far removed from the life that ordinary people live. This gap needs to be abridged and whatever is taught in University departments, should be brought into relevance for modern times.  A simple example is here. We give Graduate and Postgraduate degrees at the Convocation. Do we get an undertaking from the student that he will use his knowledge for the wellbeing of the society, and that he will never divert his knowledge towards the destruction of the living species?  Never. That is the gap between studies and life. By creating students who are morally ambiguous towards the present and the future, we are creating a corps of educated people, who, like unthinking machines can destroy the moral fiber of the society. Else, how can we account for the ‘cheat and deceit’ syndrome getting acceptance in the world? Who is responsible for the bank and cyber frauds? This is education without a moral commitment.

Read: Third Dimension Thinking: Beyond Dualities

_____________

Dr. Jernail Singh Anand, based in Chandigarh, is an Indian poet and scholar credited with 170 plus books of English literature, philosophy and spirituality. He won great Serbian Award Charter of Morava and his name adorns the Poets’ Rock in Serbia. He was honored with Seneca Award LAUDIS CHARTA by Academy of Arts & Philosophical Sciences, Bari, Italy 2024. He is Founder President of the International Academy of Ethics and conferred Doctor of Philosophy (Honoris Causa) by University of Engineering & Management, (UEM) Jaipur. Email anandjs55@yahoo.com 

Bibliography:

https://sites.google.com/view/bibliography-dr-jernal-singh/home

The post Divided Humanity: Drag Back Syndrome first appeared on Sindh Courier.

Dr. Jernail S. Anand | India

Years ago, I had written a book ‘I Belong to You: A Treatise on Cosmic Culture’ and it was translated into Persian by an Iranian scholar, Nargues Mohammadi. As the title suggests, the running theme of the book was the idea that I and you, the person whom I address, are two different entities, no doubt, but we belong to each other. There is a larger family of which, we are members. Just as people from a family are related to each other by blood, in the same manner, we who come from the commonwealth of the creator, also belong to each other by means far more than mere blood.

I Belong to You

Today, when I look back over all these fifteen or so years when this book was written, I feel a change in my perspectives. This is the result of what I have thought and lived through, during these years, and how my ideas and philosophizing has developed in a world which was rapidly changing, losing its old worldliness, and acquiring a new persona, of a high tech society. When I said, ‘I Belong to You’, the object of importance was ‘I’. It was self which looked more important. It often happens, when we are passing through the age of puberty, these are our immature years, and here, our conduct too lacks discernment, which is often found to be rash. In fact, in these conditions, we react too fast, and we lack the retention powers, which come with age.

So, though it appears to be a sagacious work which talks of spirituality, yet, what I discern in it is that it focused more on myself. Self was in the driving seat, and when I said, I belong to you, it was to some extent, and somewhere, a condescending way of loving the other. If we place the two together, we appear to suggest that love flows from me to the others. In a way, it is establishing a connection with the outside world, and saying ‘I love you’. The main focus of the story is the subject, the I.

You Belong to Me

Now, when I have seen so many winters, and it appears, may disappear in next ten, I find a different perspective appearing in my perception. It is just the reverse of what I was thinking 15 years backs. You Belong to Me is the new reigning thought.  On the surface, it appears to be a case of simple belonging, whether I belong to you, or you belong to me, it is the same thing. There are more than 15 years between these two perspectives, how can they be the same?

Certainly, I may not write another book now with the renewed title: You Belong to Me. But I do find there is something which has undergone a sea change in me. I do not look upon the world as I did at that time, when I found myself too important, and I could feel like a tower from which I looked at the world outside. I in fact have a feeling, as my mental horizons have grown, as if I am taking more and more of the living expanse into my perceptive powers, while my ‘self’ is in a reduction mode. The focus has been shifted from the ‘I’ to the ‘You’. Between these two positions, rests a great realization, a revelation, a lightful expanse of understanding that the creation in its entirety belongs to me. Everything to whom I am addressing, all the objects, have gained in significance, and they are now beckoning to me, as if calling out aloud that they belong to me. All the good and the evil that I found in the world, the good I claimed, and the evil disclaimed, have now got together, to address me once again, and I feel this world is only my spread. All the good and all the evil that reigns in the world belong to me. I am not their creator, but I am an agent of the Creator. These things were created before I was created.  And what I have created is too small in comparison to the winds and waters which support life.

All the men that are born outside me, somehow belong to me. The person in front of me, who is full of hundreds of viles, shares my blood stream. Animals, birds, vegetation, and all that man has created, the mechanical empire, the electronic empire, – are they not at my command?  Whatever God has made, lies bare in front of me. And whatever man has made, too, is lying bare, waiting for me.

The Third Dimension: From Dualities to Trialities

The world that has unfolded during the last fifteen years is different from the world that had unfolded thirty years back. Decades back, people could talk of the dualities of existence, like this world or that, good or bad, decent or indecent, and the most important duality was the physical and the spiritual. During these years uptil now, a third dimension has shaped into existence. Now, it is a world, not of dualities, but of trialities. Between the physical [natural] and the supernatural [spiritual], there is a third force, called technology, which is partly human and partly divine. It is physical because it is created from the earthly matter and lacks divinity, while, at the same time, I would like to call it para-divine, because it has been created by men, who are a part of the divinity. So, finally, everything that man has created possesses some aura of divinity, although it might lack the sensitivity and conscience that marks living beings.

It is this triality that makes things difficult for men to negotiate. Technology is a trap of convenience. We go for easy solutions, but steroids ultimate damage our moral health. And, to negotiate this trilateral trek, we need more experience, and greater perceptivity.

My stance here is: Everything that exists, is a flowering of the creative dream of God. We are a part of it. And everything that we see is part of our consciousness. And hence, belongs to us. It is not that I as a person belong to all this. The fact is that the entire spectrum of creative flowering belongs to me. It makes me richer, even if it contains contentious conceptualities.

Cited works:

Anand, J.S. ‘I Belong to You: A Treatise on Cosmic Culture, 2011 publication by Jnanda Prakashan, New Delhi. The 2nd edition of the book under the title “I Belong to You: The Dynamics of Living’ appeared in 2013 self-published by Createspace.

Read: The Cosmic Regeneration of Mankind

________________

Dr. Jernail Singh Anand, based in Chandigarh, is an Indian poet and scholar credited with 170 plus books of English literature, philosophy and spirituality. He won great Serbian Award Charter of Morava and his name adorns the Poets’ Rock in Serbia. He was honored with Seneca Award LAUDIS CHARTA by Academy of Arts & Philosophical Sciences, Bari, Italy 2024. He is Founder President of the International Academy of Ethics and conferred Doctor of Philosophy (Honoris Causa) by University of Engineering & Management, (UEM) Jaipur. Email anandjs55@yahoo.com 

Bibliography:

https://sites.google.com/view/bibliography-dr-jernal-singh/home

The post Third Dimension Thinking: Beyond Dualities first appeared on Sindh Courier.

Dr. Jernail Singh Anand  | India

The Great Disconnect

Heart is the radioactive matter placed inside the body of every living being, which receives and radiates messages to the cosmic divine.  In fact, we are, all the time, connected with supernal forces, through our breath, and we are a part of the manifestation of God’s creative magic. The scriptures want us to realize how we are a part of the cosmos, and how we should act, so that we respect that eternal bond. Education is meant to give us light, in which we could see, what we are, and where we stand, and what is the surrounding reality, and how we should relate to it meaningfully. But, education has gone overboard, and overreached its ends, so that now man thinks he can outdo his creator. Science and technology are treated as challenges to the divine authority.

There is immense knowledge in the vaults of the earth, but it is not available to men in its entirety because earth reveals its mysteries only to people who have the capability to assimilate, and look beyond their self, and see the overflowing reality. The cosmos tests the beneficiaries of its intellectual affluence, and very few stand the severe test of elements, which ensure that after getting knowledge, it will be used, not for the gratification of one person, but for the betterment of the creation. This is the point at which most of the seekers falter, and lose to infernal forces. Divinity does not trust people who show lack of higher purpose and whose passion has no higher perspective. That is why, whatever more or less knowledge we have, it is being directed towards destruction of nature and ultimately, man will land himself in a state where he will die of suffocation as the clean air will not be available for breathing.

This is how education and limited understanding of scriptures has brought us to a situation in which we are in a state of disconnect. We have our own wisdom which is in contention with the divine wisdom. Today men believe that man is born to live for himself, and die for himself, in utter disregard of any higher purpose. Struggle for existence signifies man’s struggle for survival. But, now that we have survived so many onslaughts, we have to contend with the unfolding reality of how to live? How to make our life meaningful. We have to think of beauty, decency, goodness and our commitment to the divine for promoting the welfare of the cosmic community going beyond the idea of humanism.

Post Connect

The world that thought from the heart, and felt from the mind, the world of unified sensibility which T.S. Eliot talks of, has been buried deep in the opaque layers of history. This is the world which only thinks with its mind, which is trained in such a way that it is focused on the elevation of the self. Education now serves to sever a young man’s connection from the society around, and turn all his passions inside, so that he starts thinking nothing matters except the package and then the apex of success. This is not expected from people with a universal consciousness. Rather, it is the rotten mental stuff which will infect the whole lot. Pitiably, we have got millions of teachers now trained in this passion for self-possession, who are imparting tips to the young through videos on you tube, how to serve their self, become rich, and land astronomical packages. And, I have no hesitation in saying, cheating, double dealing, and fraud are tricks in trade, and they are not considered outlandish for this society nurtured on moral complacency.

Decyphering Disconnect

The societies are crying hoarse in the name of culture. But folk dresses, folk dances, and folk songs end up only to lend a spectacular splendour only. At heart, nobody looks back. Efforts at cultural revival are proving counter-productive and blowing hot and cold at the same time. Young men in colleges who love modern life, its chores and its thrills, when don traditional dresses, only present a false spectacle of love for the things gone by. Who wants to go back to times of the bullock cart age which is being idealized in our revivalists songs? It is only noise and clutter in the music albums or in social media. Nobody wants to lead a life without a mobile phone. Farmers know their youngsters don’t like to work in the fields, rather they prefer to mortgage their lands, and migrate to cities and enjoy making films on culture. A culture which they have deserted. The culture of parents, village, the water tank, animals. So, what I want stress here is: it has caused disconnect between what we are and what we profess to be. The electronic songs won’t salvage our condition in which we do not believe.

The same disconnect is evident in the case of religion also. Look at you tube, and the deluge of the holy hymns being played.  In spite of such an electronic spurt in religious activity, the religious content in human life is on the decline. People who are truly religious believe in a life of piety, humility, compassion, and honesty. But the men we meet who often visit shrines are just the reverse. What is the reason? Even in religious orders, we see instances of indecent behaviour. The idea of righteous living, which means ethical conduct, has disappeared from the life of these people.

Let me revert to my statement in the beginning of this article that our hearts are radioactive, and we connect with the divine through our breath, which is a part of the cosmic equipment. We are a part of the spectacle, and the manifestation. So long as our heart is involved in an activity, it is radiated to the cosmos, and Gods listen to our prayers. And they do respond.  But, look at what is going on now. Instead of our heart, instead of our consciousness, it is the TV which is singing religious songs, and those who sang these songs have already made a lot of money. We have lost connect with the divine, and all our actions aimed at pleasing gods are just playing to the gallery. Contentless. That is why, all our prayers go unheeded. We play games with divine forces, and disregard all our cosmic responsibilities.  And this process of disunification is going on at a faster speed. We think we have accumulated knowledge.  I think this knowledge has hastened our fall. All our actions now onwards, when we are overusing knowledge, overplaying our wisdom, we are actually overreaching ourselves. The breakup with the divine is complete and absolute.

Cosmic Regeneration of Mankind

Here, the role of literature gains significance. What time has not corrupted is the essential wisdom of the Vedas. The Prophets still say what they said, unaffected by the currents of time. The great poets and scholars and philosophers still stand aloft, no matter how great were the storms in the oceans of time. The wisdom of humanity still remains ingrained in our scriptures. Only the teachers can check this drift of mankind into the ocean of nothingness. It is not enough to dissect the malaise, there have been scholars who have very effectively diagnosed the social issues. In fact, time has come when the philosophers take the lead, and followed by writers, they should impact the thought processes of the upcoming generations, to weed out ambition, and criminal psychology. Scientists who are working with technology, and creating new inventions like the AI need to be informed by the saner elements to stop the research which can lead to the extinction of human life.

The message is very clear. If philosophers and scientists do not come together to halt this suicidal march, there is no hope for mankind. That is why, I think that after the dystopian times, we need to introduce a new horizon to our life and letters. It is the new world of hope and all efforts of the writers and philosophers, and scientists and technologists should be on the cosmic regeneration of mankind.

Read: Illegitimate Offspring of Moral Violators

__________________

Hailing from Chandigarh, India, The author is Laureate of Seneca Award, Charter of Morava, Franz Kafka and Maxim Gorky Awards, and President, International Academy of Ethics

The post The Cosmic Regeneration of Mankind first appeared on Sindh Courier.

By Abdullah Usman Morai | Sweden

There will always be a last time.

Quiet, unannounced, and ordinary looking, yet final.

The last time you will eat your favorite food.

The last sip of a drink that once felt like comfort.

The last season when mangoes taste sweeter than memories, when winter tea warms not just the hands but the heart.

The last shirt you will ever wear, hanging casually in a cupboard, unaware of its destiny.

Perhaps we have already bought the clothes in which we will die and folded them neatly, planning a future that will never arrive.

The tragedy is not that the last time exists.

The tragedy is that we seldom recognize it.

We live as if repetition is guaranteed. As if life comes with an unlimited refill. We postpone joy, delay kindness, reschedule love, and assume tomorrow will always be available, obediently waiting for us like an unpaid servant. But time is not loyal. It does not warn. It simply leaves.

One day, without ceremony, you will pray for the last time.

Not knowing it is the last.

Your lips will move through familiar words, your hands raised perhaps half-heartedly, your mind distracted because you believe you will pray again tomorrow. But that tomorrow may never come.

One day, you will meet your favorite people for the last time.

Your mother. Your father. Siblings. A friend who knows your silences better than your words. A relative whose presence always felt like home. You will part ways casually, saying, “We’ll talk soon” or “See you next time.” You will not hug longer. You will not say everything you should have said. Because you believe there will be another meeting.

And perhaps there will not be.

Some last times have already happened in our lives.

We just didn’t know it then.

The last time you sat with a grandparent.

The last call from a friend who is no longer alive.

The last childhood evening when you played outside, unaware that innocence had an expiry date.

The last time someone loved you purely, without conditions, before life taught them caution.

We keep archives of photographs, but forget to archive moments. We save clothes for special occasions but treat life itself as something that can wait.

Even nature grants us last times.

There will be a last sunrise you will ever see, ordinary in color, perhaps slightly cloudy, maybe annoyingly bright if you’re in a hurry. There will be a last moon you will look at without realizing it is your farewell. A last rain you will complain about. Last summer you will curse for its heat. Last winter, you wished it would end sooner.

Weather changes; we do not notice.

Life changes; we pretend it won’t.

We talk endlessly about success, achievement, and progress, yet rarely about endings. We behave as if death is an administrative error, something that happens to others, preferably later, preferably quietly, preferably far away. But death is not the opposite of life; it is part of life. The last page does not cancel the book; it completes it.

And when the last times begin to approach, when the body slows down, when memory hesitates, when energy negotiates, we suddenly ask questions we avoided for decades.

What was important?

What was noise?

What truly mattered, and what was merely urgency disguised as purpose?

Was it the long working hours that stole evenings from family?

Was it the endless competition, the rat race where everyone ran but few knew why?

Was it the ego battles, the unnecessary grudges, the pride that outlived relationships?

Was it the accumulation of things that will be divided, sold, or discarded within weeks of our departure?

At the end or near the end, life conducts a ruthless audit.

Titles lose their shine.

Bank balances lose their voice.

Social status forgets your name.

What remains are moments.

How did you make people feel?

Whether you were present or perpetually busy.

Whether you loved generously or cautiously.

Whether you lived honestly or merely survived efficiently.

Grace is not something you perform at the end; it is something you practice throughout life.

To gracefully enjoy the life you live does not mean reckless pleasure or careless living. It means awareness. It means eating your favorite food sometimes without guilt. Wearing your favorite clothes without waiting for a special day. Calling people while they are alive, not decorating graves after they are gone. Praying with presence, not habit. Listening without checking the time.

Graceful living means understanding that life is not a rehearsal. There is no dress rehearsal for kindness. No retake for apologies never made. No extension for love postponed.

Graceful departure, too, is rooted in how we lived. When the end approaches, those who lived truthfully make peace more easily. They do not panic at the closing door because they fully entered the room when it was open.

Perhaps the purpose of thinking about the last time is not sadness, but clarity.

When you know something will end, you hold it differently.

You taste food more slowly.

You listen more deeply.

You forgive faster.

You argue less.

You choose presence over performance.

Life, after all, is not measured by how long it lasts, but by how deeply it was lived.

So before the last time arrives, before the last prayer, the last meeting, the last sunrise, pause.

Ask yourself:

Am I living, or merely racing?

Am I collecting days, or experiencing them?

If today were the last time, would I be at peace?

Because there will always be a last time.

And when it comes, it will not ask for permission.

The wisdom lies in living today as if it matters because one day, it will be remembered as the last.

Read: Navigating the Tides of Uncertainty

________________________

Abdullah Soomro, penname Abdullah Usman Morai, hailing from Moro town of Sindh, province of Pakistan, is based in Stockholm Sweden. Currently he is working as Groundwater Engineer in Stockholm Sweden. He did BE (Agriculture) from Sindh Agriculture University Tando Jam and MSc water systems technology from KTH Stockholm Sweden as well as MSc Management from Stockholm University. Beside this he also did masters in journalism and economics from Shah Abdul Latif University Khairpur Mirs, Sindh. He is author of a travelogue book named ‘Musafatoon’. His second book is in process. He writes articles from time to time. A frequent traveler, he also does podcast on YouTube with channel name: VASJE Podcast.

The post Philosophy: The Last Time first appeared on Sindh Courier.

• He rejected the authority of sacred texts, scoffed at rituals, and accused priests of inventing heaven and hell to maintain power over the people.
• Charvaka reached people not through temples or scriptures, but through reasoned dialogue and public debate

By Ramesh Raja

In the grand gallery of Indian philosophy, where sages speak of souls, heavens, karmic cycles, and cosmic orders, there exists a figure who stands apart; almost scandalously silent in official histories, yet profoundly loud in the corridors of reason. His name is Charvaka, or as tradition also calls him, Lokāyata; the philosophy of this world.

While India’s philosophical heritage is often celebrated for its metaphysics and mysticism, Charvaka reminds us that skepticism, materialism, and rational rebellion are also indigenous to this soil. Long before Europe’s Enlightenment, an Indian voice dared to say: “Believe only what you can see, touch, and experience.”

A Philosophy of the Earth

The word Charvaka has been variously interpreted, but it is often associated with the idea of a sharp, discerning intellect, while Lokāyata literally means “worldly”, a philosophy rooted in this world, not in imagined heavens.

Emerging around the sixth century BCE, in the fertile intellectual plains of Magadha, Charvaka arose alongside Buddhism and Jainism. This was an age of questioning, when ancient certainties trembled before new inquiries. Yet, among all dissenters, Charvaka was the most radical. Where Buddha spoke of rebirth and Mahavira of karmic bondage, Charvaka laughed at the idea of another world beyond this one.

For Charvaka, the universe was composed of matter; consciousness was but a product of the body, like fragrance arising from a flower. When the body perishes, consciousness dissolves. There is no soul waiting in line for another birth, no ledger of cosmic rewards and punishments.

The Courage to Doubt

Charvaka’s audacity lay not only in what he denied, but in how he denied it. He rejected the authority of sacred texts, scoffed at rituals, and accused priests of inventing heaven and hell to maintain power over the people. Knowledge, he insisted, comes only from direct perception; what the eyes see, the hands touch, the senses experience.

In a civilization deeply invested in transcendence, this was a philosophical earthquake.

Critics accused Charvaka of hedonism, quoting a famous verse urging people to live joyfully while life lasts, for once the body is reduced to ashes, it never returns. But this was not an invitation to vulgar excess; it was a declaration of intellectual honesty. If this life is all we have, then dignity, joy, and justice must be pursued here—not postponed to an imagined afterlife.

Founder of Charvaka

There is no historically verifiable individual founder of Charvaka. Traditional sources mention names such as:

• Brihaspati (often cast as the earliest teacher of materialism)
• Charvaka (eponymous figure)
• Purandara (later commentator)
• Purandara (Mentioned in later texts)
• Jayarashi Bhatta (8th–9th century CE), A later skeptic whose work Tattvopaplavasimha reflects Charvaka-like radical skepticism.

However, no authentic writings or biographical records survive for these figures. Most modern scholars treat Charvaka as a collective intellectual tradition, not the creation of a single historical person.

Way of Teaching

Charvaka reached people not through temples or scriptures, but through reasoned dialogue and public debate. Its thinkers engaged society in courts, learning circles, and marketplaces, questioning ritual, priesthood, and beliefs in karma and the afterlife. With no clergy, idols, or sacred spaces, Charvaka relied on lived experience, logic, and often satire to provoke thought. Truth, for them, resided not in temples but in the human capacity to observe, question, and think freely.

A Voice That Was Silenced

Unlike other Indian schools, Charvaka left no surviving scriptures. His works were lost, destroyed, or ignored. What we know of him comes from his opponents—Brahmanical, Buddhist, and Jain scholars who often caricatured his views. The absence of his own voice is itself a historical commentary: radical skepticism is rarely preserved by orthodox institutions.

Charvaka never built temples, monasteries, or lineages. He had no priesthood, no sacred geography, no organized disciples. His was a philosophy of solitary thinkers, court skeptics, and urban intellectuals who dared to question the sacred canopy of their age.

Echoes Across the Ages

Though Charvaka vanished as an organized school, his spirit never died. In modern times, his ideas resonate with secular humanism, scientific rationalism, and even Marxist materialism. Like Marx, Charvaka saw religion as a social instrument; like modern science, he insisted on evidence over faith. Yet, unlike Marxism’s collective revolutionary program, Charvaka remained a philosopher of individual experience and worldly existence.

In today’s India—where debates over faith, reason, and identity shape public life—Charvaka stands as a forgotten ancestor of dissent. He reminds us that questioning tradition is not a Western import; it is part of our own intellectual DNA.

Evidence in Sindh or Indus Valley Civilization

There is no direct evidence that Charvaka philosophy existed during the Indus Valley Civilization (3300–1300 BCE). That civilization predates the philosophical systems of ancient India by over a millennium.

Similarly, there is no archaeological or textual evidence linking Charvaka specifically to the ancient history of Sindh. However, Sindh later became an important center of other philosophical and spiritual traditions (including Buddhism and Sufism), which engaged with materialist ideas in various ways.

In the 1990s, Rasool Bux Palijo in his talk on Hinduism, Budhism and Jainism in Hyderabad; spoke about Charvaka as a forgotten voice of resistance. He said that in ancient times, when religious leaders went to preach, the Charvakas followed them; not with prayers but with questions. They taught people to live naturally, to care for the body and mind, and to focus on this life rather than promises of the next. Their ideas were materialist and based on reason, not fear. Because, this challenged Brahmanical power, Charvaka philosophy was not debated but destroyed. Their books were erased. But, yet Charvaka survives in memory, proving that ideas of freedom and reason cannot be fully wiped out.

Charvaka Alive in Today

No one today calls themselves a Charvaka. There are no temples, no congregations, no census category for Lokāyata followers. Yet millions unknowingly share his worldview—atheists, rationalists, scientists, skeptics, and ordinary citizens who believe that truth must be tested, not inherited. Charvaka is not followed by people; he is followed by ideas.

Books to Understand the Philosophy

Almost no original Charvaka texts survive; knowledge comes mainly from quotations and critiques by Brahmanical, Buddhist, and Jain scholars. Key historical references include the Bṛhaspati Sūtra and Sarva-Darśana-Saṅgraha.

Today, to understand Charvaka, several modern books are useful: Lokāyata / Cārvāka: A Philosophical Inquiry (Pradeep P. Gokhale), Lokayata: A Study in Ancient Indian Materialism (Debiprasad Chattopadhyaya), Ancient and Modern Empiricism: Charvaka and Logical Positivism (Dr. Kiran Jaydeo Save), Charvaka Darsanam (Dr. Dharmaraj Adat), Carvaka Philosophy (Shastri/Heera/Bhattacharjee), and Uniqueness of Carvaka Philosophy in Indian Traditional Thought(Bhupender Heera). These works provide a clear understanding of Charvaka’s materialist and rational worldview.

A Whisper from Antiquity

In a civilization that often celebrates transcendence, Charvaka dared to celebrate the tangible. In a culture that often postponed justice to the next life, he insisted on justice in this one. In an age of unquestioned authority, he made doubt a virtue.

Perhaps that is why history tried to forget him.

Yet, as long as a child asks “Why?”, as long as a thinker demands evidence, as long as a citizen challenges sacred power, Charvaka’s ancient whisper continues:

“Do not bow to illusion. This world is enough.”

Read: Diplomacy vs. Biodiversity: The Houbara Bustard’s Dilemma

____________________

The author of this article, Engr. Ramesh Raja, is a Civil Engineer, visionary planner, PMP certified and literary enthusiast with a passion for art and recreation. He can be reached at engineer.raja@gmail.com  

The post Charvaka: Materialist Voice of Ancient India first appeared on Sindh Courier.

Dr. Jernail S Anand

In a constant and consistent effort to better things, men have gone from philosopher to philosopher and innovation to innovation, only trying to restate in understandable words, the mysteries which confuse our mortal understanding. Ages have changed, epochs have changed, but there is a shocking continuing in human suffering born of recklessness of human thought and behavior. Man’s extreme understanding of a phenomenon turns irrelevant in the next century, and we glide into another great theory which we understand better. But the end result is the same: suffering.

Why our understanding and our actions do not change?

We know history repeats itself. Why? Because men do not change. Every generation reads the same history, and therefore remains the same. If we want change, or expect a transformation in human perception and conduct, we will have to stop reading the history which has resulted in continuity.  We have to break away from the evil that has been a part of human perception, and our action in the past. If our young men go on reading the same, reveling in the same paste of the past, the taste will not change. So, we have no right to complain that there is no change for the better. When we study the worst, the fruit of this wasted labor will be nothing but the worst.

Are we born to suffer?

Yes. The reason is obvious. Our knowledge systems block our vision and disable our thinking apparatus. The changes that we bring to our lives, in the form of AI or higher techniques of human comfort and joy, touch our lives externally. AI while giving us access to great intellectual feast, also serves to dull our thinking apparatus, the fear looming large that it might bring us down to zombies. If machines start thinking for us, [even now only they remember our contact numbers], we will lose our memory. Becoming an amnesiac cannot be a great destiny for mankind. Machines have made man more powerful, and power without wisdom is a dangerous acquisition. We need a better understanding of our systems and our condition. Because, we do not live only at one plane. Power, wealth, money, facilities bring joy to mankind. But not happiness. Because, there is another deeper layer of human existence. It is the soulful arena, where we have to distinguish between right and wrong. Where we have to go beyond getting and begetting, and think of giving back to nature, and squaring the account of life. Here, science has utterly failed to infuse a sense of belonging and a sense of responsibility among humans. And this is the reason why we suffer, even while we enjoy bounties of nature and machine.

How to stop this suffering?

I think we become what we see and we are what we are fed on. It is all a game of historical perception. We are a part of the running procession of time and if a man cannot get rid of his past actions, how can humanity as a whole be free from the reflexes of its deadly past? We can mix past and history here, and think of the past history as an edifice of cruelty, wars, massacres, and bloodshed, which underline how wolfish had been the man who stands in our shadow. And we teach everything very religiously to our young minds. Our folly is we want change, from an exercise, which is rooted in status quo.

Re-architecting a Positive History of Mankind

Man, in the past, has shown his guile and vile, but this is not the ultimate truth about him. If the leaders of men, who moved the civilization forward, believed in aggression, killings, and every type of foul activity, there were men also who did good to this society. I wish we re-architect history from the ashes of guile and vile, and build an edifice of goodness, and fairness, and teach that to our young kids. We should visit our past, and find our examples of people who did good to society. Raja Harish Chander is one example. Ashoka the Great is another. But how many we come across? So few. We need to focus on people who gave away their best to this society. History focuses on the evil of mankind, let us build a parallel superstructure of goodness. And this will be the right thing to teach our young kids.  Do you know Bhama Shah? We corporate world must have Bhama Shah Chair in the Departments of Commerce. Can’t we have a Diwan Todar Mal chair in the Departments of Economics? There is good in our past, but we try to focus only on the evil that was enacted.

If we suffer today, it is because of our priorities. The teaching of mankind across generations has suffered from a malefic vision, to keep the society wallowing in pain and suffering, and never to let it rise to greatness and goodness.

Note:

[Bhama Shah was a rich merchant who offered his wealth to great Shiva Ji, to re-organize his armies and fight the Mughals. And Diwan Todar Mal was a rich merchant who offered gold mohurs to purchase a piece of land where the two younger Sahibzada’s of Guru Gobind Singh, who were bricked alive, could be cremated].

Read: Before the Truth Strikes Back…

________________

Hailing from Chandigarh, India, the author is Laureate of Seneca Award, Charter of Morava, Franz Kafka and Maxim Gorky Awards, and President, International Academy of Ethics

The post Re-architecting history on plank of goodness first appeared on Sindh Courier.