When Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh visited Myanmar last month, an assurance — the first of its kind — came from the Myanmarese government that Northeast India militant groups settled in that country would be flushed out and that it would not allow any anti-India activities in its territory. After the visit, the Myanmarese government reportedly asked the Northeast militant groups to leave that country by June 10 — a response that was appreciated by Union Home Minister P Chidambaram, who expressed hope that the Myanmarese government would hand over all arrested Northeast militants to India. The deadline of June 10 is already over, but the Myanmarese government is yet to crack down on any Northeast militant groups operating from there.

Is the Myanmarese government indulging in ruse in so far as its loud and clear assurance to India is concerned? Or is it that the Myanmarese Army and its intelligence have their own road map that precludes any real crackdown on Northeast militant groups there? These posers assume importance in the wake of reports that the June 10 deadline was actually set by the Khaplang faction of the National Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN) for four Manipuri militant outfits — United National Liberation Front (UNLF), People’s Revolutionary Party of Kangleipak (PREPAK), People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and Kanglei Yawol Kanna Lup (KYKL) — to leave Myanmar; the NSCN(K) being the most powerful Northeast militant group operating from that country and provides shelter to other outfits from this region, including the Paresh Baruah faction of the United Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA). If the June 10 deadline story is indeed so, one would infer that the Myanmarese government has simply exercised a choice of not cracking down on any Northeast militant groups under the protective umbrella of the NSCN(K) while it might act tough against the groups that the NSCN(K) wants out. But it raises another question: Why should that choice be exercised? Is it because of the five-point ceasefire agreement that the NSCN(K) signed with the Myanmarese government on April 9? Or is it because the Myanmarese Army is still the most powerful institution in that country that the NSCN(K) has a furtive deal with, under which a suitable give-and-take policy has been effected? And, then, what about reports that the Northeast militant groups settled in that country have been paying the Myanmarese Army and its intelligence through the NSCN(K)?

The NSCN(K) cannot operate so powerfully in Myanmar as has come to light without support from the Myanmarese Army — in the same manner as Kashmiri terrorists cannot get arms training in Pakistan without help from the Pakistan Army and its Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). Likewise, the fugitive and recalcitrant commander-in-chief of the ULFA, Paresh Baruah, cannot operate blissfully in the Ruili area along the Myanmar-China border, as reported, without the knowledge and aid of the Myanmarese Army and its intelligence. Or perhaps the NSCN(K) has a pact with the Myanmarese Army and its intelligence not to touch Baruah because both the outfits have a common agenda — the enterprise of terrorism, including of course illegal arms dealing, in the garb of ‘fighting the common enemy called India’ for their people’s ‘liberation’!

The point is simple: Given the above, especially the June 10 deadline fraud, it is incumbent on the Indian government to simply ask the Myanmarese government as to why the deadline has not been met and what is stopping it from cracking down on the NSCN(K), with which the Indian government has a ceasefire agreement, and its disciple-outfits like the Paresh Baruah faction of the ULFA? It seems it is time for some really inconvenient questions too, of which one could be: Is China dictating terms to Myanmar vis-à-vis militant leaders like Khaplang and Baruah? It is the candour of such questions that ought now to be in display, while our security-intelligence grid cannot fail to ensure that Northeast militants from Myanmar do not sneak into this region and cause mayhem — Team Paresh Baruah can be into anything to prove its presence and sustainability.

It would be in the fitness of things if Sansuma Khunggur Bwiswmuthiary tenders an unconditional apology to the people of Assam for casting aspersions on Srimanta Sankardeva, without any loss of time, and desists from making any shallow but devastating remarks on the most versatile saint of this land

After a Russian prosecutor filed a case against the Bhagavad Gita, levelling the most blasphemous and malicious allegation that the circulation of this holy book of the Hindus would promote violence in Russia, and should therefore be banned, now it is the turn of one of the Boro politicians of Assam, Sansuma Khunggur Bwiswmuthiary, to demand a ban on the holy Kirtan-Ghosa, the most revered religious book of the Asomiyas, composed by Mahapurusa Srimanta Sankardeva in the 15th-16th century. While the Russian court refused to pass the requested ban order after considering all the pros and cons, including the opinion of international experts, the Boro leader in question, without any provocation from anywhere, and just like the bolt from the blue, brought out a copy of the Kirtan-Ghosa and opined before television cameras, showing the following portion of the holy book, that Sankardeva directed that the Meces-Boros-Kacharis be exterminated or killed at the end of kali yuga by Kalki-avatara and that even the Buddhists were to be killed in the same manner:

Kalira sesata haiba Kalki-avatara

Kati mari mlesaka kariba bundamara//

Sabako badhiba Baudhagana jata ache

Kalira sesata Satya pravatiba pacey//

To suit his own political or undeclared vested interests, with the possible fallout of a communal flare-up between the Boros and the non-Boro Asomiyas, Sansuma, in his self-assumed avatar of a Sankari scholar and authority on the sacred Vaisnava literature, declared that Sankardeva, by asking for the extermination of the mlechas, had actually issued direction for killing of the Meces-Boros-Kacharis and also all followers of Buddhism through Kalki-avatara. As such, he demanded, at a public meeting in Kokrajhar on 19 June, that the Kirtan-Ghosa be banned immediately.

The above blasphemous statement by a responsible Boro leader has been severely condemned by the Sattra Maha Sabha, Hindu religious leaders, Asomiya intellectuals, Sankari scholars and hundreds of thousands of followers of the Mahapurusa, and rightly too. Effigies of Sansuma were burnt in different parts of the State, demanding unconditional apology from him, and there were reports of decisions to file criminal cases against him for committing blasphemy and inciting communal violence in the trouble-torn State, where movements by non-Boros against Boro high-handedness in BTAD areas, and against the demand for a separate State for the Boros, have been going on. Fortunately, the president of the Boro Sahitya Sabha, as also BTAD chief Hagrama Mahilari, minister Chandan Brahma and some other right-minded Boro leaders, have realized the gravity of the situation arising out of the uncalled-for action of Sansuma and have either disassociated or condemned his statement. Hagrama has gone one step further, asking his compatriot to tender unconditional apologies to the Asomiyas immediately, in the interest of the Boros themselves.

In this context, readers would do well to note that for the first time in history, after the maha-prayan of Sankardeva in 1568 — that is, after 444 years — such a demeaning demand has been raised, and that too by an educated Boro leader who has also served as a Member of Parliament, without even caring to take expert opinion on the subject and giving his own interpretation of the word mlechas, making it synonymous with the three tribal communities of Meces, Boros and Kacharis. What prompted Sansuma to make the volcanic statement and blasphemous demand, only he knows; but it will be relevant to bring out how wrong he was in making his interpretation of the word mlechas without bothering to go into the life, preachings and practices of the Mahapurusa and also the basis of his creating the holy book eulogising his only deity, Lord Vishnu, and his human form, Lord Krishna.

Let us peruse the preamble to the Kirtan-Ghosa, which is what Lord Krishna said to Arjuna, as stated in the Bhagavad Gita:

Yada yada hi dharmasya glanir bhabata Bharata

abhyuthanam adharmasya tadatmanam srjamya aham//

paritranaya sadhunam vinasaya ca duskrtam

dharmasamsthapanarthaya sambhavami yuge-yuge.

The English transcript as made by Dr Sarvapally Radhakrishnan stands as follows: “Whenever there is decline of righteousness and rise of unrighteousness, O Bharata (Arjuna), then I send forth (create incarnate) Myself. For the protection of the good, for the destruction of the wicked and for the establishment of righteousness, I come into being from age to age.”

The caturvimsati avatara varnana or the 24 incarnations of Lord Krishna as described by Sankardeva in his Kirtan-Ghosa were primarily derived from Bhagavad Purana, Book X, XI and XII, as stated by Dr Maheswar Neog in his Sankaradeva and His Times. So, what Sankardeva wrote about destruction of the mlechas and all including the Baudhagana actually meant destruction of all wicked and unrighteous people or evil-doers at the end of kali yuga by Krishna in his incarnation as Kalki. It is non-sensical to bring the Meces/Boros/Kacharis under the name mlechas as done by Sansuma, without going into the totality of the life, preachings and practices of the Mahapurusa, as also the preamble to the Kirtan-Ghosa as stated herein before.

It would be of interest to know that during the times of Sankardeva, a vile, degraded form of Buddhism, known as Vajrayana or Bamachari form of Buddhism, was holding sway in some parts of Assam, which was a “queer mixture of monistic philosophy, magic and erotica, with a small admixture of Buddhist ideas”, which admitted the five M’s or pancha makara — madya (liquor), mamsa (meat), matsya (fish), mudra (parched grain) and maithuna (sexual intercourse) — as indispensable ritual for the votary. There was also a class of devotees of a goddess called bhogis, who like the Tantric or Bamachari Buddhists committed to the pancha makara, believed that by sacrificing their lives at the altar of the goddess they would attain salvation. Syed Abdul Malik, in his Dhanya Nara Tanu Bhal, gives lucid details of the sexual excesses and extravaganza of the bhogis at the cost of poor women, including married ones, on the pretext of volunteering to be sacrificed at the altar of the goddess on a prescribed date. Well, all these degraded, anti-social people doing all unrighteous acts fall in the class of mlechas and are destined to be destroyed by Kalki-avatara, not the Meces, Kacharis, Boros and other members of any tribes.

It would be relevant to mention that Sankardeva embraced thousands of members of ‘impure’ tribes, including the Kuvacas or the Koches, Mlechas or Meces(!), Kacharis, Kirats, Garos, Miris, Chandalas, Ahoms or Asamas, Bhotas or Bhutias, Yavanas or Musalmans etc into his faith, after which they became ‘pure’ and also gave them the position of atai. Some such devotees are Govinda (Garo), Bolai and Paramananda (Miri or Mising), Ram (Kachari), Damodar and Jairam (Bhota), Purnanda (Kaibarta), Haridas (Bania), Narahari (Ahom), Murari (Koch), Chand Kha or Jaihari (Yavana) etc. How could one (unless he is ignorant or irrational) even imagine that such a saint would ask for the heads of Meces/Boros/ Kacharis etc through the medium of Kalki-avatara? Sankardeva had his firm conviction that the souls of dogs, Chandalas and donkeys too are verily God, and knowing this, he urged upon his followers to respect them all. How could one ever imagine that such a Mahapurusa could issue direction by invoking Kalki-avatara to exterminate the Meces/Boros/Kacharis as alleged by Sansuma Khunggur Bwiswmuthiary? For grasping the great qualities of the head and heart of the Mahapurusa and for dispelling any wrong impressions on him and his creations, interested persons may go through my research work titled Sankardeva: His Life, Preachings & Practices, apart from any other work on the saint.

Finally, it would be in the fitness of things if Sansuma tenders an unconditional apology to the people of Assam for casting aspersions on the most versatile saint of this land, without any loss of time, and desists from making any shallow but devastating remarks on Srimanta Sankardeva, his successor saints, and his followers or any of their creations. Otherwise he should be prepared for facing legal action for committing blasphemy against the Hindus and provoking communal hatred, as already declared by some followers of the Mahapurusa.

JP Rajkhowa

In my humble opinion the best translation of Urdu poetry into English were done by Victor Kiernan of the works of Faiz Ahmed Faiz. It was joint effort. Kiernan was teaching English in Lahore’s  Chiefs College. Faiz was teaching English in an Indian College. Kiernan had on Indian wife and was a fluent in Hindustani. They became friends and together worked on the translations. They are a joy to read.

In my not-so-humble opinion my translations came next in merit. I have done a better job than any other Indian, Pakistan or foreign scholar in giving Urdu poetry good readability. My method is to first memorize the original and keep repeating it in my mind. I do his many times in bed as I retire for the night. The translate on emerges bit by bit as I doze off. My translations have been well-received. My rendering of Iqbal’s Shikwand Jawab-i-Shikwa published by the Oxford University Press has gone into more than fourteen editions. It goes on selling. So do my compilations made jointly with Kamna Prasad, but translated entirely by me: Celebrating The Best of Urdu Poetry (Penguin). I quote one memorable verse by her.

Rast yoon dil mein teree kroyee huee yaad aaee

Jaisey Veeraney mein chupkey aey bahaar aa jaaye

Jaisey sahaaron mein  hauley sey chaley baad-e-naseem

Jaisey beemaar ko bevejah qaraar aajaay

Last night the lost memory of you stole into my mind. Stealthily as spring steals into a wilderness. As on desert wastes a gentle breeze begins to blow. As in one sick beyond hope, hope begins to grow.

Sauda.

An eminent Urdu poet whose couplets I have memorised was Mohammad Rafi Sauda (1706-1781). My favourite couple is:

Saaqi gayee bahaar dil mein rahee havas

Too minnaton sey jaan dey aur Main Kahoon key ‘bas’

O Saqi, gone is the spring of youth

Remains but one regret in this heart of mine:

Had you but pressed the goblet in my hand

Had I but said, ‘Enough: Enough: no more wine:

Another favourite is:

Jab yaar ney utthaa kar zulfon key baal baandbey

Tab mainey apney dil mein laakhon khayaal baandhey

When my eloved raised her arms together up her tresses

A million desires gathered in my heart and got tied up in a tangle.

Meer

Meer Tagi Meer (1722-1810) is a great favourite among lovers of Urdu poetry. Though born in a village close to Agra, he spent most of his life in Delhi. His most favourite poem among his admirers is his eulogy to drunken-ness.

Main nashey mein hoon

Yaaro mujhey muaaf rakho main nashey mein hoon

Ab do to jaam Khaali hee do main nashey mein hoon

Masti sey barhanee hai meree guftagoo key beech

Jo chaaho tum bhee mujh ko kaho main nashey mein hoon:

Maazur hoon, jo paaon mere betarah padey

Tum sargiraan to mujh sey naa ho main nashey main hoon

Bhaagee namaaz-e-jumme to iaatee nahee hai kuchh

Chalta hoon main bhee, tum to rahe main nashey mein hoon 

Naazuk mizaaj aao qayaamat hein Meer Jee

Joon sheesha merely munh ha lago main nashey mein hoon.

I am somewhat drunk

Friends, you should forgive me, for I am somewhat drunk

And if, you must, give me an empty cup, for I am somewhat drunk.

This is intoxication you hear not malice in my talk

you too may curse and call me names, for I am somewhat drunk

You can see that I am helpless, when I try to walk I stumble

Don’t be cross with me, please don’t grumble, for I am somewhat drunk.

The Friday prayer is always there: it won’t run away

I will come along too if you stay a while, for I am somewhat drunk.

Meer can be touchy as hell, he’s of fragile glass

Watch what you say to him to night, for he is somewhat drunk.

i) Free Hospice

Q: What is the proof that India is a ‘Dharmasala’?

Ans: The presence of the Dalai Lama at Dharmasala.

ii) Monsoon Singh

Q: What is the advantage of having Badal as Chief Minister of Punjab?

Ans: Expectation of rainfall always remains.

iii) Soda or Water

Over a TV channel a Godman was hearing the problems of a faithful when he suddenly interjected and said:

“Why ‘soda’ is coming in my mind? Do you take Whisky”

“Yes, Prabhu,” replied the faithful.

“Do you take with soda or water?”

“Sometime with soda at other times with water,” promptly answered faithful.”

“Stop using soda. Your problems would evaporate in no time,”

Godman pronounced the solution.

(Contributed by KJS Ahluwalia, Amritsar)