Why go to university?

                                                                                            Moti Nissani, USA (1947- )

I. Literal Comprehension

Context: This essay is written by a contemporary American writer, Moti Nissani.

Going to university might be a stressful situation in our life when we have family responsibilities and job. We cannot work and earn. Instead, we have to pay for our education and living expenses. We will have to put an extra effort. But there are many advantages of going to university. First, one may get lucrative job and promotion, and improve one’s income and social status by getting a university degree. Second, a person with knowledge is protected from many troubles in life and will not be cheated. He can handle even difficult situations rationally. Third, a knowledgeable person generally enjoys better health than anyone else in the society because he can avoid many risks for his health. Fourth, he knows the values of exercise for the mind as well as for the body. He keeps his mind healthy and fit by reading regularly. Fifth, a learned man is respected in any kind of society. A person with all other qualities is not regarded so highly until he is educated. Sixth, university education also makes a person inquisitive and curious. Then, knowledge becomes its own reward. Seventh, one can widen one’s social horizons by making new friends and sharing new experiences at the university. A university provides an alternative setting for satisfying our needs for companionship, personal growth, and friendship. Education also increases our freedom. It makes us less dogmatic about our own beliefs, and more tolerant about the beliefs of others. The knowledge about the universe is worth having. Finally, only educated people can help democracy develop. They can judge the policy makers and their policies while preventing the leaders from misusing their power for their own interest.

II. Interpretation

This essay might be trying to tell us that only education has made human beings different from the animals. Therefore, we must try to be educated by going to university. Otherwise, we will have no right to call ourselves the wisest creature on earth. We should also get university education to lead a happy, civilized and meaningful life.  

III. Critical Thinking

Even though I agree with the writer for his appreciation and strong support for the university education, I don’t think it’s possible for us in Nepal to get knowledge just for the sake of knowledge. Mostly, we are job-oriented. We want to get a high-paying job after the graduation. But there is no guarantee for the better job and higher income after the university education unless we have somebody in power. I also don’t believe that scholars are more respected than rich businessmen or politicians in Nepal. In fact, an educated person is miserable if he doesn’t have a good base of parental property.

I            IV .  Assimilation

Education helps us, directly or indirectly, to lead a quality life. Education also readies people for good practice of democracy. Actually, democracy cannot sustain unless the people are educated because they are easily misled by the cunning leaders. Therefore, now I know why democracy has not been so fruitful in Nepal.

If not higher

                                                              -Isaac Leib Peretz, Poland (1852-1915)

I. Literal Comprehension

Context: This essay is written by Isaac Leib Peretz (1852-1915). It has attempted to show us the life of the clergymen.

The Rabbi of Nemirov would be absent during the Penitential Prayers every Friday morning. He would not be found in synagogue or the two Houses of Study or at a minyan. The common people believed that the rabbi would be in the heaven at that time, but a Litvak, a Lithunian Jew, doubted on it. Since he had studied argument and law, he thought that even Moses, the supreme teacher of the Jews, had not been able to go to the heaven alive. One day he decided to find out the secret of the rabbi’s disappearance. He entered the rabbi’s house secretly on a Thursday evening and kept waiting under the bed. The rabbi came in and fell asleep in his bed, but the Litvak stayed awoken whole night though he was very much afraid. When the rabbi got up in the morning, he refreshed himself and performed his pray to god. Then, he went to the closet and wore peasant's clothes: linen trousers, high boots, a coat, a big felt hat, and a long wide leather belt. He picked up an axe from under his bed and put it in his belt before leaving the house. Checking every house of the village secretly, the rabbi headed to the jungle. Then, he cut a small tree and made a bundle of firewood sticks. He carried the bundle on his back and walked back to the village. He stopped at the door of a small broken-down shack and knocked at the window. A sick Jewish woman replied from inside. She said she could not buy the firewood, so the rabbi offered her to lend it to her. Since she was very weak because of the illness, the rabbi himself kindled the fire for her. While doing so, the rabbi recited the Penitential prayers. Thus, seeing all this, the Litvak became the rabbi’s disciple immediately. Now, when another person asks him about the rabbi he replies that he has higher place than the heaven.  

II. Interpretation

This essay might be trying to tell us that religion is for practising in everyday life, not for only talking about and praying. Those who only pray to god are the hypocrites. The Rabbi of Nemirov not only prayed and worshipped the god but also practiced his ideology in his everyday life. He disguised himself into a peasant and secretly came out of his house to serve the needy people. The story shows us that heaven is at the service of humanity. By serving the poor sick widow, the rabbi felt that he ascended to heaven.

III. Critical Thinking

Is it ok or possible for a Rabbi to go elsewhere leaving aside the religious services during Penitential Prayers? Can we think he is a responsible and practical person? Isn’t his act whimsical? These questions arise in the mind of a reader after reading the story. Moreover, it is impossible to find such an idealistic person as the Rabbi of Nemirov in our society today. This essay has also tried to apprehend the critical thinkers. Litvak, the critical thinker, is so much criticised and mocked at in this story. I wonder why the rabbi could not see the Litvak closely following him throughout his journey to the jungle and back to the village.

IV. Assimilation

This essay has taught me the real meaning of the heaven. It is not any imaginary place which can be reached after death only, but it is the state of our mind which we gain after helping the poor and needy ones. The rabbi reached in the heaven every Friday during the Penitential Prayers. Therefore, now I know the value of practicing the religion in everyday life.

24.11.14

The brave little parrot

                                                                                          Source: Buddhist Legend

                                                                                        (Rafe Martin’s Adaptation)

I. Literal Comprehension

Context: This story has been adapted from the Buddhist Legend by Rafe Martin. It describes an event in Lord Buddha's previous life as a bird.

           Lord Buddha was a parrot in his previous life. Once, because of thunder and lightning, the jungle where he lived in caught fire. The animals started running hither and thither to save their lives. The parrot also flew away to the sea to save its life. But he was kind and could not see other animals and birds suffering from the blazing fire. Therefore, in an effort to put out the fire, he drowned himself into the sea and came back to the fire to sprinkle the drops of water above it. He repeated this action several times, but it was impossible to quench the roaring fire in that way. His legs were slightly burnt. His lungs ached. His eyes were red. Some gods who lived in the happy place (heaven) were enjoying delicious food above in the sky. They didn’t pay attention to the sufferings of the animals and the birds. Moreover, they laughed at the parrot for his futile efforts. But one of the gods felt sympathetic toward the parrot, disguised himself as a ferocious golden eagle and flew to the parrot. He advised the parrot to stop his silly act and save his own life. Despite the eagle’s effort, the parrot was not ready to stop sprinkling water drops to the burning flames. The god looked at his fellow gods and felt ashamed for their apathy toward the suffering of animals and birds. Therefore, he cried and his tear came out of his eyes as two powerful streams. The fire was put out and everything was restored to the previous condition. All the dead animals came alive again. The parrot also became hale and hearty again with red, green and yellow feathers.

II. Interpretation

The story might be trying to tell us that we should not be hopeless when we are in crisis. We must keep our duties with patience and strong determination even though there is no reasonable chance for success. Though his own life was in danger, the parrot did not give up until he succeeded to save others’ lives. The story is also an example of the statement that only the sufferer knows the pain of suffering. The gods of the happy realm did not have any sympathy toward the dying animals and birds, but the parrot knew what suffering was and tried to share the pain with others. The parrot finally proved that we can be successful in getting god’s help if we work selflessly.

III. Critical Thinking

    There are so many things in this story that are very difficult for us to accept. Who believes in this 21^st century that there are gods and that there is the heaven? Is it possible for the dead animals and birds to be alive again with the magic of god? Is it possible that even the parrot and the eagle speak like human beings? Who believes in the modern time in the idea of reincarnation? Were there not other parrots in the jungle? If there were, why does the story talk about only one parrot? Despite having all these questions unanswered in mind, readers can enjoy the story as a legend.

IV. Assimilation

 This story has taught me the meaning of the proverb: God helps those who help themselves. Nothing happens without our effort. If we put our effort, then god helps us to make it successful. This story has also taught me that all great people are not good and unselfish. Despite their greatness and strength, the gods, except the one that comes to help the parrot, did not show their sympathy.

22.11.14

Yudhisthira’s wisdom

                                                                                 Source: The Mahabharata

                                                                                 -          Shanta R. Rao’s adaptation

I.                   Literal Comprehension

Context: These excerpts have been taken from the Mahabharata, one of the two major Sanskrit epics of ancient India, recounting events that allegedly took place some 2,800 years ago. The writing of this epic took place centuries later, possibly spanning from the Vedic period (about 2,500 years ago) to the early Gupta period (about 1,700 years ago). According to Hindu tradition, the author is Vyasa.

While hunting for deer in a forest, the five Pandava brothers grow thirsty. Exhausted, Yudhishthira sends his other brothers, one at a time, but they too fail to return. Then Yudhishthira goes to search for his brothers. He finds a beautiful pool, but alas, near it he finds his four brothers prostrate on the ground, either dead or unconscious. Unknown to Yudhishthira, they have all ignored a Yaksha’s admonition not to drink the water before answering his questions. Despite his overwhelming thirst, Yudhishthira obeys the Yaksha. Moreover, he correctly answers the Yaksha’s philosophical queries. Pleased with Yudhishthira’s wisdom, the Yaksha agrees to revive one of the brothers, leaving Yudhishthira to decide which of the four it will be. Yudhishthira bases his choice entirely on moral considerations, not on his own selfish needs and predilections. The Yaksha reveals himself as Yama (the god of justice and righteousness), tells Yudhishthira how pleased he is with his uprightness, restores to him his four brothers, promises him protection from future hardships, and gives him some useful advice on where to go next.

II.                Interpretation

The story may be trying to tell us something about the importance of patience, obedience to gods, wisdom, and right conduct. Without these characteristics, the Pandava brothers would have been lost. The story can also be interpreted to mean that righteousness not only makes you feel good, not only contributes to brighter prospects after you death, but that it pays right hers on this earth. The philosophical portion is of course of great interest, with reflections on such concepts as desire and courage.

III.             Critical Thinking

For the critical thinker, this story is a veritable gold mine. Here are a few examples of what skeptics might say about this charming tale. Are there gods out there? If so, what is the evidence for their existence? Can we truly say that patience and right conduct are rewarded on this Earth? Isn’t it a historical fact that precisely the reverse is more nearly correct? Was the righteousness of people like Socrates, Gandhi, and Martin Luther King rewarded while they lived? And what about Yudhisthira’s replies to the Yaksha? Do such complicated questions really have simple answers? Would astronomers agree that the sun shines by the power of God? Is courage the best weapon against danger? Why not wisdom or sheer luck? Was Gandhi loved because he gave up pride? Would life be worthwhile without desires? Isn’t it the case that many believe that passionless life is not worth living? (For instance, a character in Parijat’s Blue Mimosa says:

                  “When love and emotion die in a man, he survives as nothing more than a machine.”

There also seems to be a slight internal contradiction in this tale. After being told not to drink the water, the four younger brothers obediently wait but the Yaksha says nothing, leaving them with the impression that they have been hallucinating. Can we then say that Yudhisthira’s brothers defied the Yaksha, but that Yudhishthira didn’t?

One could also argue with the choice of material in Flax-Golden Tales. “Yudhisthira’s Wisdom” is obviously an abridged excerpt of a vast epic. Should students be given such condensed adaptations of texts and then asked to judge them out of context?

Yet, at the end of this process, I am still left with a moving tale which beautifully captures some aspects of the human condition.

IV.              Assimilation

This story led me to question some of my views about abridged texts. Until now, I have felt that one ought to read original materials. Yet long before reading the condensed version reproduced in this text, I had read the unabridged Mahabharata. Surprisingly, I like the abridged version more- the original contained too many details while this version reduced the story to its essence. I now think that, in some instances, shorter versions of some texts have some virtues which the original text itself does not possess. This might apply, in particular, to orally- derived ancient epics such as the Iliad and Odyssey, and perhaps also to such works as Shakespeare’s Hamlet, Dante’s Divine Comedy, and Cervantes’ Don Quixote. If I get a chance, I might try to read some abridged versions of these works.

This story brought for me many associations. It led me, for instance to ask, again, which view is right: the one which extols desire, or the one which holds it to be the source of much suffering and evil?

(Source: Nissani, Moti and Shreedhar Lohani (Eds). “Applying the Four Reading Levels to Yudhisthira’s Wisdom”. Flax Golden Tales (2013): 19-22. )
Watch on Youtube www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcOj_zQAFyQ

What is intelligence, anyway?

                                                                                       -Isaac Asimov (1920-1992)

I. Literal Comprehension

This essay has been written by famous 20^th century American science-fiction writer Isaac Asimov. In this essay, he has discussed about the human intelligence and the relevance of aptitude tests.

When the writer was in the army, he scored more than his colleagues in aptitude tests. They loved him for being highly intelligent, but he was given only the responsibility of the assistant of cook. The writer’s self-satisfaction for being a highly intelligent person was of no use because he could not fix his broken down car. He had to depend upon a supposedly less intelligent car mechanic for that. The writer would have to simply follow the car mechanic’s directions. He was also unable to answer correctly when the mechanic asked him how a blind man would ask for scissors. Therefore, the writer thinks that his intelligence is not absolute; it is the function of the society he lives in. He thinks that he would not be intelligent if the questions for aptitude test were set by the mechanic, or a farmer, or anyone but an academician. He would not be able to use his academic training and verbal talents.

II. Interpretation

This essay might be trying to tell us that a person fit for something cannot be fit for everything. The writer was a highly intelligent person as per the academic aptitude test, but he was just an assistant cook. The estimated less intelligent auto-repair man easily fooled him. Thus, the essay has attempted to break the traditional wall of intelligence that has existed for long between academicians and non-academicians. The essay has also revealed a manual worker’s point of view toward academicians. The auto-repair man thinks that an educated person like the writer cannot be very smart in practical issues of daily life.

III. Critical Thinking

Though I fully support the writer’s opinion that even a person who has not been to university can be smart, I don’t agree with him that an aptitude test is so much useless. The writer has claimed that a person’s intelligence cannot be absolute; it’s the product of the society the person lives in. But he has forgotten the fact that a person with high intelligence can learn a new skill faster and in a better way than the others with low intelligence. The auto-repair man can fix a broken-down car because he is used to doing it daily. The writer cannot do the same because he is not used to doing it. But if both of them learn a new skill together, the writer would surely excel.

IV. Assimilation

This essay has taught me to value everybody I meet in my everyday life. Now, I’ve understood that even an ordinary mechanic can be smart in his own way. So, we should not disrespect anybody as a less intelligent person. It has also taught me not to feel inferior even if I meet somebody with higher intelligence.