Sumedhas

Am I a worthy Thambi?

2011-09-04T11:18:00.002+05:30

http://www.sumedhas.org/

Am I a worthy thambi? ?

Raghu Ananthanarayanan

August 2011

The Beginning

Anna Hazare has been a person i have been interested in. I first read about him in the Readers Digest many years ago. Some of his achievements were exciting, his story of transformation was inspiring. Some of his methods seemed a little bizarre but i recognise that they were meaningful in the context. I have admired his courage in standing up against the Maharashtra Government on issues of corruption.

Images courtesy Buddha Direct

The Present

It is a strange sight to see Anna splashed all across the television screens, with a large picture of the Mahathma as a backdrop, and Kiran Bedi doing her comic routine in stage in front! Once in a while we see a few rock musicians singing to the crowd. Since the TV has not relayed the sound one is not sure if bhajans are being sung or are they pop songs. May be democracy is being celebrated and one does not understand the youth. But, it was very moving to see the interview with a young lady from Bangaluru who had undertaken a sympathetic fast and had fasted into the twelfth day with Anna.

So, am a good thambi?

Me and the caveman

1. When I look at a Discovery Channel programme that shows a person in Africa or old America before the Colonization, I feel evoked, sad and nostalgic for a simple life. The dream of the person on the screen is simple, he or she wants to find enough food for the family, be safe from enemies and predators. As this person grows older, this person will hope to find a niche that is easy to live in, with enough food and shelter. A niche that few can enter and destroy.

2. I have the same dream. It might look different, but it is the same essentially. I think my niche is about four or five crores in a bank, with a sense of safety around the GDP growth of the country.

3. The person in our channel living in the jungle or desert space, uses a small stick or a crude cutting device to dig the earth or cut trees. I do the same today for the same reasons, except, I use a huge bull dozer or and chainsaws.

Seven eleven to eight sixteen

4. A dear friend said to me after seven eleven, that he was clear who he was, 'I am an American, I realized that my life depends on the safety of America' he said. I felt betrayed. This guy who was with me in all our critiques of the Vietnam war and the singing of Dylan songs is going over to the other side, he is choosing to be one of them!

5. Eight sixteen has asked a question of me, it is presenting me with a mirror and asks me, are you a member of the middle class or not? What does this question mean to me? In having the aspirations that resonate with the cave man, I find that I am fragmented between two realities. On the one hand, my aspiration is innocent and sounds valid. Every advertisement and TV programme is telling me that it is the way to be, as are most movies, books I read etc. However, at another level, I see clearly that it is for me and millions like me that the PM made the statement, about the need for India to stay on course to becoming a developed nation and taking it's place among the powerful nations of the world. It is for me that Chidambaram is amassing troops around the so called 'Maoist' areas of India. It is for me and my aspiration that POSCO must be allowed to exploit the Land and break it's laws on environmental protection. All this is key to keeping the GDP on course!

My dilemma

6. Now the dilemma begins. May be we are the first generation in India to discover that the way we live is not the right way. For the previous generation, fighting for independence was a source of great meaning and worth. Before that was the idea of ridding the world of autocratic aristocrats and creating democracies. Today, the paradigm of middle class aspiration and personal security that was at the heart of the communist and capitalist revolutions of a few generations back is in question.

7. By ensuring a clean government that will ensure my security and pander to my aspirations, I am part of a huge interconnected world that impoverishes the earth, and marginalizes people. I am connected to the forces that first create and then destroy the Saddams and the Gaddfi's of the world. I am invested in the same system that supports the Goldman Sachs adventures in making money of governments and letting them fail or bail them out! I can choose to be oblivious to these realities, stay cozy in my middle class-nes and continue to work for organizations that are very much at the heart of the GDP paradigm.

8. If I take this larger reality seriously, and I am concerned about the earth and equity, I am at odds with my livelihood. It is as simple as that. Do I choose to say 'yes, I am middle class. I will be solidly behind our poor PM who wants to ensure a 10% growth rate for India.' or do I say 'I will find ways to act that are simultaneously meaningful to me and the larger whole?'

9. In making it a binary, I am not creating an either or, I am stating a dharma sankata. I was squarely at this point when I just finished my graduation. A personal crisis and a danger to my family rescued me from the dilemma. Today I am have walked a path that has taken me to the present dilemma, which in many ways is the same. The only difference is that the larger reality is more widely appreciated.

Where am i now?

10. I am therefore agonizing one more time. Can I make a realistic choice? Do I convert the dilemma into an either or and say 'come on Chidambaram, get the Maoists?' can I really put my weight on the side of the 'activists', am I prepared to pay the price? Do I believe in the ways of the activists? Can I find a new way through this dharma sankata?

11. The Roy's i.e., Aruna and Arundhati make sense to me. Team Anna does not. The only reprieve they have given me is that the idea of a peaceful struggle has been reiterated. For how long will this work? I don't know. Till the slaughter of the Maoists a la Rajapaksha begins?

12. I compare myself with my stone age friend. If I put him in the centre of his world, the world does look simple. There are few of his kinsmen that help him, an elder who explains the world to him and nature to befriend, contend with. If I put my self in the centre of my world, I see a very similar mind, but a complex web of dependencies that I don't really understand. I vote and delegate my control over my security and the use of resources, it's distribution and the like to a set of politicians that I neither respect nor trust. I pay my taxes and hope that the government agencies will provide me with infrastructure that is robust and reliable, i find the facilities they offer very poor in quality. I depend upon corporations to provide me with my essentials and I am not very sure they have my interest in heart. I know that the idea of a corporation is primarily committed to making money and I am only a means to enhancing shareholder value.

13. My everyday sense of security i have delegated to the police and the way the law and order is maintained by them, and I know how easy it is to bribe them and get out of situations where I have broken the law. I base my idea of the world on the media and when sees how biased they can be and how focused they are on TRP ratings and advertising revenue, I am afraid I am cocooned in a web of misinformation. I am hoping that scientists will help me understand reality and give me reliable knowledge, I find that huge effort and money goes into commercially rewarding research or into defense research.

14. I could go on and on, and finally, I am floating on a network that could be very far removed from any reality or integrity. When i compare myself to the caveman again he might actually ‘know’ more than i do! If i apply the old meaning of ‘know’ as in having made love to, he engages with his world sensually and viscerally in a way i do not. My world is largely a cerebral construct based on questionable information. Yet, there is no other space I am competent to live in! On what ground will i stand to build a world however small that will be integral, sustainable and equitable? There are a lot of stories and predictions about the 'Dawning of the Age of Aquarius'. An age resting on a spiritual ground, that is just around the corner. Do I really have faith in being part of the emergence of such a world? Will some great sic-fi solution come up that will sustain this world and it's economic models?

My view of the context

15. All this and more is the turmoil Anna and his team have plunged me into. The world i see is very simple: there is the facade called law; there are a few people behind this facade who are empowered to use it with integrity, but exploit the world with impunity, fully protected by the law they control; there are people on the other side of the law, the ones the law controls and constrains. these people are extracted from and stopped from defending themselves by using the letter of the law. Then there are the street smart ones who use/ create loop holes in the facade and hook themselves on to the coffers getting filled behind the facade. I am clearly on the ‘controlled and constrained’ side. I don’t know how to fight this system and change it. I can’t live with it with any sense of integrity or comfort.

16. There is a similar facade across technology called Modern Technological Organizations. This too has people on either side of the facade, and the rules for membership are more tightly held. Its structure is less amenable to democratic processes, dynasties are legitimate, and extraction is the reason for being! here too there are those on the outside of these structures, and those on the inside. there is a very similar differential of resource access, and holes through which a section of the population can go in and out! however, those who hold the levers of power here, are more permanent and entrenched. The relatively more temporary holders of power behind the political facade are in deep collusion with these Barons. In this world, i am on the right side of the facade, thank God!

17. Unfortunately, the drama and the games played out around these two facades seems to be completely out of sync with the Global problems, all of which are created by the success of the ways in which these structures, one that acquires resources and the other that acquires power operate. They come together in the Military Industrial Complex very visibly. War is their most profitable enterprise. The vested interests of both these facades lies not in a new and more global confrontation of the global issues, but in the perpetuation of the present structures that prey upon individual misery and individual gain.

My cave though i am not a cave man!

18. So i create a kind of a thrishanku swarga, live inside a cocoon and a small world relatively insulated from the large scale predation of the world. I see only two kinds of ‘leaders’ on the international scene: the predators and the well meaning but ineffectual ones. Therefore, i am not very hopeful that the world will not go through a great turmoil before the autocracies and the ‘democratic autocracies’ give way either to unadulterated exploiters or inspired stewards.

19. I clearly see four personas that i act from: One, the organization consultant, two, the process worker, three the yoga teacher and four the prison guard. The prison guard needs introduction. He is the one who is afraid of being resourceless and powerless, and controls the amount of time, attention and energy that the other three personas and their worlds will get. The first persona is clearly in the world of ensuring adequate acquisition of money and reputation, the prison guard is fully aligned with this persona. The process worker is in the world of genuine search, and the prison guard is an ally. The exploration of the ‘processes’ that create the various identities makes me a hero in my own eyes and of others! The Yoga Teacher is kept in check. He can add and embellish the other two, but not take up too much time, since the prison guard is not sure he can earn money or reputation!

20. The prison guard is a great votary of the middle class and ways of means to become upwardly mobile! he will go along with Anna so long as the world is made easier to navigate.

21. So thats the kind of thambi that i am.

Co-formulating

2011-06-06T19:38:00.002+05:30

http://www.sumedhas.org/

Co-formulating: The Aphorisms for the Human Context

This is a first draft attempt to put down the principles and theoretical underpinnings of the way process work is emerging in Sumedhas. Pulins work is the base document, but we have made some movement, particularly since the social context of the times are changing and changing fast.

The always changing 'personality' is thus : " Na ca so, na ca anno" Neither the same, nor another!  Any "Person" is  always changing, not the same, not identical, and thus  without any identity, yet neither another, but continuously  becoming an otherwise and different set of phenomena!  Gauthama the Buddha

Purusha was alone absorbed in a deep meditatation

Prakrithi was alone celebrating the potential for infinite manifestation

What is meditation without content? What is celebration without manifestation?

Prakrithi in her deep yearning created a space. Purusha awakened to the other. In their discovery of each other time began.

The gestalt of matter was the first manifestation,(annamaya kosha)

The gestalt of vitality was the second, (praanamaya kosha)

The gestalt of thought was the third, (manomaya kosha)

The gestalt of insight was the fourth, (vignyaanamaya kosha)

The gestalt of ecstasy was the fifth. (aanandamaya kosha)

Human beings have the potential to encompass all the five gestalts/ envelops. However, they are caught between the manomaya and the vignyaana maya (thought and insight). They therefore fall into avidya (erroneous perception): they take the impermanent to be enduring, the unwholesome to be healthy, the sorrowful to be liberating and the non-self to be self. Therefore, they live in dukha and strive for mukthi and liberation. Since dukha is full of pain and fear, they seek refuges from pain and fear believing that these refuges are permanent, wholesome, joyful and enlivening.

Based on the Upanishads and the Yoga Sutras

“They seek refuge in other people, they seek refuge in material possession, they seek refuge in knowledge and they seek refuge in the idea of god. The first two refuges reveal their falseness easily while the latter being founded in belief are more deeply rooted. They result in much violence before they reveal their falseness. It is only when a person forsakes these refuges and confronts sorrow directly that the person takes the first step to end sorrow”

Gauthama the Buddha

1. A space is created where being can be nourished.

2. In this space, the intent ‘to be’ is awakened.

3. This intent is gestated in a dream of being in desirable and glorious ways.

4. The intent emerges from the dream as a form, and is energised to act because it contains the dream.

5. In its movement towards ‘becoming what it dreamt of being’ it encounters / engages with other forms.

6. This engagement / encounter are in the world of phenomenon. This world is full of experiences some pleasurable and some painful, some nurturing and some annihilating.

7. The instinct for survival compels the movement towards engagement with the phenomenological world.

8. This emergent form that has been injured / deprived / denied / discriminated against creates refuges to avoid hurt.

9. It creates various refuges – dependencies on other people – the saviours; acquiring power and becoming counter dependent –> conquering the oppressors. Thus a basic motif is created – the Victim / the Oppressor / the Saviour.

10. The engagement experiences opportunities and threats that are ‘desire / fear’ feeling -> fight and flight

11. Since the impermanence of the phenomenon is not recognised, and the absence of ‘self’ in the forms one creates is not recognised, one falls into the delusion of permanence both of the threats / opportunities as well as fear/desire.

12. The dynamics of fight / flight is then ‘frozen’ into a few ‘forms’ of identity; a limited number of ways of perceiving and creating context; a limited set of choices of action and role taking. The perception -> meaning -> choice -> action pattern is frozen.

13. This pattern is the ‘world generating’ algorithm / motif of the person. This can be captured in the word that completes the sentence I ……………therefore I am.

14. In a ‘personal growth lab’ an ambience of safety and security in being able to voice ones feelings and is created. Shame and guilt that accompany ones self censoring and self shaping are absolved. The participants begin to reveal their true ‘inner form’ without social appropriateness. The group then becomes able to ‘listen, with a listening in which the self and other reveal their hurt / distorted selves’. This is the stage of relief and release from the fear “how will I be received” and one feels understood.

15. This quality of listening creates an ambience where cathartic self expression becomes possible. ‘Gifts can be offered and received’ all emotional expressions and whatever they trigger within are accepted. This allows the participant to ‘own up’ the disowned feelings. This is the stage of the ‘Kissa Gotami’ story.

16. A combination of the listening and the receiving of gifts opens up the person to discover a coherent narrative of the self. Shame and guilt are suspended and the narrative is deep, reflective and replete with the pathos of ‘having become’ the kind of person one is. Dreams and deep intent of the being are touched. Psychodrama’s that are repeatedly enacted become clear. Identity patterns are discovered and owned up. The person could release themselves from these patterns and psychodramas and begin to re-shape their life context.

17. In some groups, the listening, receiving of gifts and the discovery of ones narrative reveals narcissistic hurts and the whole structure and inner process that has been built up as a refuge, and a defense mechanism. The ‘Victim-Oppressor-Saviour’ motif and the context in which this was first created are discovered. The individual becomes capable of embarking on a quest to realise and manifest ones deep dream.

18. Discovering this inner landscape and its drama is LSE.

19. The process of emergence, the context of the drama of becoming and the various forms and strategies one employs in the course of ‘becoming’ is the LSE.

20. The drama of LSE has at its core a ‘narcissistic injury’ – the form of the emergence experiences severe blocks to its becoming; the form could experience deprivation of nurturant resources; the form once ‘mature’ could experience blocks to fructification.

21. The individual is born into a family and the family exists within social structures.

22. The intent with which one is born, has to navigate the phenomenon of the family and society in order to gain the three fundamental where with also to ‘become what one is meant to be’. These are - knowledge, ways of organising and technology.

23. Each of us attempts to recreate the context in which our identity feels reinforced (popularly called one’s comfort zone, though this may be painful and oppressive indeed!). One uses force heroically to maintain these ‘comfort zones’, or aligns with those who promise to protect the space/ infra structure/ power structure/ systemic patterns that constitute these ‘comfort zones’.

24. This causes the play of power and politics where only the heroic and visible actors are acknowledged. The energy of the ‘followers’ flows into these figures. If these figures allow themselves to be set-up, either consciously or unconsciously, they are seen as the ‘leaders’ of the ‘followers’ who actively or passively energise the creation/ maintenance of the comfort zones.

25. The structures and processes of families and society have been evolving over millennia. The Existential Universe Mapper offers a framework through which the stages of evolution can be understood. Each Existential Universe is a space that allows certain sets of ‘intents of being’ to exist, and nourishes them while throttling others. It allows certain sets of forms to manifest; a certain set of relationships to be developed among those forms; and therefore a certain ambience to be fostered.

The ‘Clan’- the world people and objects different my tribe is the Devil, ‘my tribe’ is the Saviour and I am the potential Victim. My compulsion is to seek belonging.

The ‘Arena’- any ‘other’ is the enemy; my heroism is my Saviour; I am the potential Victim and my compulsion is to seek power.

The ‘Clockwork’- those who believe in a different ideology are the enemy; my ‘god and his soldiers’ are my Saviour; I the sinner is the Victim. My compulsion is to be obedient.

The ‘Network’- those who are organised for competing objectives are the enemy; my collaborators are my Saviour; I the inadequate one is the Victim. My compulsion is the search for competence.

The ‘Ecology’- those who do not replenish the ecology are the enemy; my ecology is my Saviour; I the infinitesimal part of the ecology is the Victim. My compulsion is harmony.

The ‘Integral’- there are no enemies / Oppressors nor Saviours outside my mind, I the fragment is the potential Victim, my quest is for deep integration.

26. Boundaries and boundary management processes define the space. Infrastructures and processes of nourishment and fostering allow the intents to manifest. Structures and power relations shape the forms; systems regulate the nature of linkages and engagement between the forms; rules and norms of behaviour regulate the emotional ambience.

27. The systems interface exploration helps the participant discover these universes as they manifest in and impact the life space / work space of the participant.

28. Unlike small groups that have a propensity to facilitate the exploration of self, community sessions and large group sessions facilitate the exploration of the ‘social character’ of the context of ones life in the here and now. The external spaces, structures and processes that one creates and sustains through the meaning making, choice making and role shaping processes. Each one of us develops not only the structures that are self protecting/ self nurturing, but also extends them into “cities in the mind”: large collective spaces, structures and processes in which ones own home will be safe! One may not want to be the king of ones city, but one creates a city in the mind with ones own desirable position, role, structures of power and dispensation etc. Each location and Existential universe will create its own distinctive city, and expect oneself and others to engage with it in ways that are self protective.

29. The (M3) exploration helps the aspiring process worker discover the nature of the ‘laboratory for self reflexive exploration’ that they can offer from their being. What is the nature of the ‘space’ they can create and sustain; the sets of ‘intents’ they can nourish; the forms they can resonate with; the range of engagements they can facilitate and the kind of emotional ambience they create.

30. The M3 invitation is to explore, enter, a variety of universes, and be willing to re-experience my own deepest fears and hurts, without recreating my particular inner drama.

31. Faculty building is an invitation that the faculty offer themselves to enter and re-encounter the space of ones narcissistic hurts, find the space of the mind innocent of hurt, discover how to play with the energies that are freed of their entrenchments and frozen-ness and see what forms of the self and social systems one can create. It seeks to find a space that is ‘co-herent’ (in an un-fragmented here and now); role taking that is ‘co-respondent’ (creating complementary and supplementary and co-held actions); convergent (creating a movement that has a similar direction). This space is created from the individual locations that each faculty member discovers in ones journey of encounter with ones inner processes. In this process, it is clear that the ‘social context’ of the programme space will create its own set of oppressions, opportunities, threats, evocations and provocations. Being able to own up to all of these and examine them is the 'process of creating the process space' in which the participants explore their inner world.

Pubescence Inverse

2011-04-22T14:15:00.000+05:30

Propositions for dialogue:

• Proposition one: As one grows old, several processes by which the sense of ‘me’ were developed start to reverse. Therefore there is a chance to understand the processes of identity development, and let go!
• Proposition two: Symbolically speaking, where his tumescent penis ends, a man’s self ends and the other begins. Depending upon how the other is perceived, life is beautiful or horrendous. I am not sure of how to frame this proposition in a woman’s perspective, please help!

Let me share with you how I came upon these propositions and lets have some conversations over them. Sashi and I are observing that we are less and less inclined to engage with the world. Since we take a daily walk on the beach, we compare it to the wave that is ebbing. The days of high tide are over. We are also saying that we have done our best in engaging with all the challenges life threw at us, now, we don’t feel like even perceiving life as a challenge any more, if we cant rise up to (note the symbolism here) the challenge, so be it. This is not in a resigned kind of a way, but in an acceptance of the absence of desire and power to do so. This is where the fun starts.

One side of me says that’s fine, but another says ‘how will you survive if you give up and give in?’. This voice when I watch it carefully is really interesting. It seems to have three energizers; firstly the compulsion to ensure that the ‘me’ as I hold myself survives!! Eeks how irrational, but, ….The other two are equally interesting one says ‘there is so much more for you to express’ the other says ‘what if you do express yourself and it is not received at all?’

As I look at these three voices, it becomes clear to me that I have created the ‘me’ through a response to these three all the time. My response is the tide going out, it is the self meeting the other! The other starts at the point where my energy meets it. ‘I’ exist till the extent of my extension. Now the drama that unfolds at this interface determines how I shape my ‘me’. If my response is adequate, the ‘me’ has survived, it has been affirmed. If it is less than adequate, if the expression of the ‘self’ is not received as I expect it to be, I retain hurt, self doubt …. pain, dukha. If it is received better than I expected, it leads to a sense of pride, self aggrandizement….pleasure, sukha.

Perhaps these are the urges that one is unconscious of in ones childhood. These vectors are trained and reinforced by society. This acting out of the tumescent self is expected and judged all the time! Denying this urge is elevated as the ‘sanyasin’s way’ but is not meant for ‘us’.

I saw ‘Black Swan’ when I was engaged in this internal examination. There are two areas where the inner process of the ‘swan’ struck me strongly, sexuality and envy (the swan is a symbol of vanity) . When I examine envy from this frame, the drama gets very interesting: the ‘me’ wants to express itself in a way that truly reflects its beauty and power, and in doing so, hopes it will have what it sees the other having. Even as this strong desire takes root, a deep fear arises ‘what if I am not received the way I wish to be’. One starts wobbling between these two very powerful energies. One is propelled to shape oneself, put in a lot of effort to become worthy, at the same time a deep anxiety and fear take root. Action does not emerge. Perhaps this is the time another part of the self starts to psychologically fear the world and attack the other. Also, may be envy is a more solid blocker of action than a motivator! I wonder if looking for certainties of being received well is also sourced here. This can be a real double bind too. ‘Am I truly received and loved or are the responses the reflection of my own demand for respect?’

In the film , the other end of power namely vulnerability is also examined through sexuality. May be the most vulnerable one can ever feel is when one is tumescent with desire and the other rejects you! That’s what the film explores starkly. The way my body is and its sensitivities and possibilities of expression are something I can do very little about. I am wired, formed in a way I can only discover, therefore the utter helplessness and vulnerability to processes that are only vaguely under my choice. Is that why sexual continence is seen as the most tangible proof of self control by any one professing to be moral/ religious? Even Gandhiji seems to have wrestled with this all his life. So much of ones self image and self worth is built around sexuality, so much of this reinforced by society both in its evocation and in its prohibition that it is easy to see how the idea of ‘survival of the me’, desire and fear around being recieved can get enveloped within this energy vector.

As I write this I wonder if the sexuality issue can be even more powerful than envy since it is linked with a process over which I can’t have any real control, while with my talents I can feel some sense of hope . I can imitate, practice, learn and become proficient. At least that is how all education is sold. Sexuality falls into the more dangerous vanity space, a space where ‘to fake is to be’, and the ‘as if ‘is celebrated.

So when physical and psychological menopause starts, and the sea stars to ebb, death is palpable. Do I see the non self as a danger, an invitation or a mystery to be embraced and celebrated? Do I fight the waning of my power, my body and my ability to ‘tumescend’☺ How come there is no word for the ending of male reproductive capability? If pubescence is the process of engaging with and rising into life with the excitement and hope of encountering non-self in ways that are enlivening, is there a counterpoint to pubescence? What is this slow and sure encounter with death called?

Sumedhas Summer Program 2011 at Thekkady, kerala - May 2011

2011-02-26T14:08:00.001+05:30

hello everyone,

below is a letter from Gagandeep Singh, Program Director, Sumedhas Summer Program 2011. Please read the letter which I am sure you will find thought provoking - and do visit our website for the brochure for the Summer Program.

The Sumedhas Summer program offers

Read through, post your comment and we would be happy to get back to you.

sharbori

Letter from Gagandeep Singh:

Dear Reader,

Often the world around us, in the way we perceive and experience it, seems to be tottering on a certain edge - many times, it appears as a frenzied dance of collective angst, heralding the end of human life the way we have known it, emanating deep despair, and engulfing us into a void where we feel alone, alienated, and numb. This image is fuelled by the decay, and the corruption of structures and systems that govern us, that organize us, that socialize us, that market us, and that once imbued us with the promise of wellbeing, honor, dignity, and freedom.

And yet, this certain edge can also be seen as a threshold, a threshold that invites the Hero and the Leader in each of us to look beyond the dark cloud of doom, co-define and co-create - a world that we would like to believe in. Rediscovering the Hero within would mean becoming aware of self-limiting descriptions of who we are, recurrent patterns of behavior that keeps us pegged and inhibit our growth. Generating this awareness entails a serious confrontation with oneself and the carefully constructed defensive walls - a daunting task that one usually runs away from for fear of experiencing the painful and seeing the ugly.

The Sumedhas Summer Programs have been a sacred space, committed to fostering self-reflexivity, an ability that is so uniquely human. It as also been a space that has sustained its endeavor to seed new meanings and perspectives through wholesome dialogue and reflection anchored within the community of participant co-travelers. For many it has lent a healing touch, an experience of release, and newfound commitments.

Today, it becomes critical to re-state what the Summer Program really stands for, and how it can impact the individual and the collective.

• At a granular level, it offers a space to develop skills, competencies, and wherewithal to facilitate self-reflection in a group setting.

• At an experiential level, Sumedhas continues to offer a unique set of laboratory learning opportunities for individuals to engage in a self replenishing journey of inner discovery.

• At an institutional level it offers each of us a release from becoming obsessed with the mirror, and in befriending the witness within, with the hope that man’s violence unto himself and the context will reduce.

I invite you to the 15th Summer Program where we collectively explore and dialogue on not just mere tools for transformation or for leadership concerns, but towards an internal integration at a personal level where new meanings and action potentials emerge and become the foundation for transforming our world. It might well be the most significant step towards being the hero and a leader you were meant to be.

Gagandeep Singh

Program Director

Sumedhas Chapter Meeting Mumbai - 15th Jan 2011

2011-01-03T19:02:00.002+05:30

Greetings of the new year to all!

Some of us were chatting and thought it would be good to get together for a Sumedhas chapter meeting in January. Once again, a space to come together, to share whatever it is that we would wish to, to re-connect with Sumedhas and fellow travelers (Sumedhians or not) in the journey of reflecting on ourselves and human phenomena, the human context.

The details:
Day, date - Saturday 15th Jan 2011
Time - 12:30 p.m. - 4 p.m. (we'll order in food depending on how many people are there and share the cost)
Venue - Bhavana Issar's home (she's offered it very kindly); A 1301 Oberoi Woods, Mohan Gokhale Road, Goregaon East (please write to Bhavana separately for directions)

Please send in your confirmations to:
Bhavana Issar - bhavana_issar@yahoo.com
Vinti Mehta - vintimehta@gmail.com

Feel free to bring along anyone who is interested in/ curious about process work... Wanderers from outside of Mumbai are most welcome to join us...

Looking forward to creating a our space!

Best
Vinti

2010-08-16T07:34:00.002+05:30

When the urban Indian audience laughs at satire on poor farmers in the brink of starvation, in a multiplex, with tickets priced at Rs 300 per seat, popcorn at Rs 65, a cup-of-corn at Rs 45, diet pepsi at Rs 65, its a satire in itself. Political circuses over poverty, starring politicians and journalists, seems to suit the palate of the urban movie-goer. One does remember the Amitabh Bachchan starrer - Main Azaad Hoon, as one of the earliest ones of this genre of films. Then came the Shahrukh Khan Juhi Chawla film - again about the media circus over a man sentenced to death penalty. Shyam Benegal's film about a kidnapped well was hilarious, though it came and went without much notice due to poor publicity and distribution. Peepli, LIVE, the latest in this series, seems to have caught the imagination of a Calcutta multiplex audience, with 9 shows per day. No coincidence that a sizeable population has watched this film on India's 63rd freedom anniversary.

On the event of this anniversary in both - India and Pakistan, the usual 'freedom celebrating messages' did the rounds in facebook as well as the SMS circuits. Some messages were less than celebratory - lamenting all that has not been achieved in this free country.

Coming back to Peepli LIVE: the story is set in a village somewhere in India where farmers are in penury. Their poverty, starvation and deprivation do not make good enough 'stories' for the media. But a live suicide of a farmer, does. Swarming journalists, including a Barkha Dutt -like character, are shown as vultures always in search of stories like carcass. The sparring Chief Minister and agricultural minister at the centre are unabashed in their fight for power. The film ends with the telling suggestion of how displaced farmers take to city labour, and how India, in its city centric growth, is forcing farmers to give up agriculture to become unskilled daily wage earners in the city.

I agree with the attention towards the urban-rural inequalities in growth and, therefore, income. The question is what does an urban middle class and upper middle class do with this information. It evokes guilt and anger. We curse politicians for their corruption, but of course. We also curse the incompetent bureaucracy and its red tape. However, we would not agree with greater attention towards rural development, if it was to be at the cost of any of the benefits that we currently enjoy. We want our cheap labour - in our homes, our factories and shops, in our offices. It is ironical.

Its depressing, if nothing else. There is nothing in the current mainstream political (party) discourses that suggest any alternative in the coming years. Politicians will cater to the interests of the majority (especially the majority of the powerful,a nd the powerful comprise of the urban). Business and media also have their own vested interests. So does the amorphous 'development sector/ NGOs/ activists'. Yet, there are a few exceptions in each one of these segments. There are, and must be, a few politicians who think differently, and struggle to hold onto their convictions in the present political domain. There are a few industrialists, businessmen who do not think that business is only about economic profit, and that CSR is only about augmenting its political profits. And I know of a few activists or social workers who are not sold into the idea of building personal institutions. The question is - how responsible do we, the masses, as the polity, respond to this complex state of affairs?

2010-08-01T00:46:00.004+05:30

A couple of years ago, over a dinner , people were discussing about voting, and this wonderful 'Jago re' campaign. I wondered what were people's issues, based on which they would vote. This was predominantly a middle-class/ upper-middle class group, of ages between 20 and 40. Most people had an idea which political party they would or would not vote for, but were not clear about specific issues that would dictate their choices. More specifically, they had very little idea about political manifestos or the agenda in them, about the candidates they would be voting for (they were opinionated about leadership of the various parties but not the political leaders of their own constituencies). One of the members in the group (a 23 year old woman, who had then recently completed her management) said - 'there is nothing that any of these political parties will or can do that is going to have a direct impact on my life'. I was left with the question - what meaning do our memberships hold as citizens of ? Is citizenship a matter of transaction between the state and individual/s/ communities? Is this only a stage in an evolving democracy or is this indifference a mark of something else?

Moving onto another context. Founding members of organisations often experience a lack of boundary between themselves and the organisations they have started. It builds to a crisis when, after a period, the founding member/s need to retire/ move on, and another generation of leadership needs to take over. I have seen leaders go through emotional turmoil, vascillating between stances of disengagement at one level and holding the organisation at ransom (you do what you want, I know it will fail, no one knows the 'right thing to do' as well as I do), and 'I shan't let go, I am ultimately the one that holds the best interests of the organisation/ institution more than anyone else'. They, in such situations, would never question the meaning of their memberships in organisations/ institutions, and yet, are they really a member in these organisations, or is there a complete diffusion and therefore no experience of themselves as members? Is a leader a member in a group, or is there hierarchy in membership?

In more social contexts, especially in families, memberships are often attached with roles. Roles that are assigned by sex, age and lineage. In our times, I see a huge struggle or dilemma between what we, as individuals would like to do, and what these roles demand from us. As people challenge these roles, in several cases their memberships have been threatened, questioned or even been rejected. Let me present a few examples: (a) when a young man, an ex colleague, disclosed his sexual orientation (of being gay) to his parents, they requested him to go away to another country, to study or with a job, and never come back - so as to save them from social embarassment (b) A friend of mine (a lady in her early fiftees now) had chosen to walk out of her marriage without 'strong/ convincing enough' reasons (to parents and family), which would probably mean extreme domestic violence or infidelity, she was rejected by her family in different ways, in a sense, her membership in that family was nullified. (c) The innumerable cases of girls, marrying out of their communities, being disowned by their families or, in certain communities, even being killed to protect family/ community honour is another glaring example.
The issue of memberships in Sumedhas is a question that recurs periodically. Much, on this topic, has been said, reflected, clarified and reiterated. I experience this membership at a daily level - sometimes through engagement with fellow members, but more often than not, through a internal dialogue. I have not yet understood or realised if my membership also has a 'role' attached to it. But its been one of the most resourceful memberships I experience.

Sumedhas Summer Program 2010 at Thekaddy, Kerala

2010-05-09T20:41:00.001+05:30

Sumedhas Academy for Human Context

Offers

14th Summer Program

15th – 29th May 2010 Spice Village, Thekkady, Kerala

14th Summer Program 2010 Welcome...

Dear Reader,

I am pleased to invite you to the Summer Program, 2010 (May 15-29) being offered at Spice Village, Thekkady, Kerala. The following pages set out in some detail what the programs on offer are.

Every year offers that something... a compelling case for us to take a pause, and to examine the nature of the world, our work, and relationships. The associated sense of wellbeing or stress, of joy or distress, of hope and helplessness, of elation or despair are often good starting points to begin this examination.

More than 12 months into the global financial crisis, one wonders if the lessons have been learnt – at the level of governments, organizations and individuals. Can an unending appetite for acquisition and wealth ever assure wellbeing? Recent research shows that “Firms of endearment” that have stayed on the course of ‘doing good while doing well’ have out performed the “good to great” companies by a factor of 3. Mindfulness and self-reflexivity are seen as essential characteristics of effective leadership, especially in difficult times.

The drumbeats around global warming during the same period have got louder and the arguments for and against, shriller, leaving very few untouched by it. In the midst of the din, some salient questions stay: who am I in this context? What is my relationship and responsibility...to other human beings...to this earth? What does life and living mean beyond livelihoods? Is there place for a dream? What guiding principles would I like to live by? What are role choices that I willing to exercise? What action choices can I give myself? Exploring these questions may be essential to discovering the right path that each of us must walk.

The world and our work intrude into our living rooms unfailingly every day. The world has thus seemingly shrunk, and yet the sense of isolation, distance, and aloneness has aggravated. Internet enabled connectedness has fed the illusion of a plenitude of friends. However, deep sharing, togetherness, and intimacy is increasingly uncommon. Human touch is “uncool” in a context where the ‘touchpad’ and ‘touch screen’ receive more strokes from one, than a fellow human being. What does it mean to be human in these times?

Sumedhas programs draws people from diverse backgrounds who reflect on some of these questions and other concerns in a spirit of inquiry and community. Sumedhas spaces are a cauldron of experience and emotions, and a community of people committed to self – reflection, self-discovery and, the evolution of self, the systems they belong to, and the larger context. Insights that come from such reflections have been forerunners for new perspectives and frames for action.

Welcome to the Summer program. Ask what questions are engaging your mind at this time? Make a choice from the program offerings that seems like the space suited to your search. Be there. Discover other co-traveler along the way.

.K S Narendran, Program Director

2

FOR MORE DETAILS PLEASE VISIT : www.sumedhas.org

or contact:
sharbori: 9845564848
naren: 9500080564

Mumbai Chapter Meet - Apr 30, 2010

2010-04-11T19:59:00.000+05:30

Given our melodious, "flowing" experience last meeting, here's our next Mumbai Chapter Meet, also at Prithvi Theatre.

Date: April 30, 2010
Time: 7 to 9 p.m. (we will begin and end the meeting on time, so please plan your availability accordingly)
Venue: The Cafe @ Prithvi Theatre, Janki Kutir, Juhu, Mumbai - 400049

Please RSVP to:
Priya Malhotra: on 09967025897 or at priyamalhotra1@gmail.com
Arun Nabar: on 09820372425 or at arun_nabar@rediffmail.com
Vinti Mehta: on 09870149448 or at vintimehta@gmail.com

All are invited to join - and that includes Sumedhians and non, Mumbai-ites (or should I be saying "kars") and non! Only entry criteria - a curiosity and interest in the proceedings.

Look forward to seeing you!

Notes from the Mumbai chapter meet - Feb 26, 2010

2010-03-22T15:17:00.002+05:30

The Mumbai chapter meet on Feb 26, 2010 was held at Prithvi Theatre Cafe in Juhu and was attended by Arun, Priya and Vinti. The flute being played by an old-looking cheerful man in black with a flowing white-gray beard was an experience that helped as the soothing tunes that flew flawlessly created a space for sharing. All of us thought it was a help to three of us from the outside.

We began with a general catching-up and moved into statements about where we are in our respective lives and what are the dilemmas and questions we face currently. We also talked, in particular, about the response to the Sumedhas Chapter meetings in Mumbai. After the first meeting, the response, in terms of number of participants, has dropped considerably (3-4 people participating each time) and we shared our own responses to this phenomenon. Our responses range from belief in the process and peace with ourselves about the meaningful nature of the chapter meeting space to anxiety about whether this space is meaningful for others, how to make it so, what to do to increase participation? All of us acknowledged that our attendance of the chapter meet was due to our own need to feel connected and have a space to share. we also acknowledged that that may not be everyone's need at this point in time. We had a sense of resolve that despite the anxiety and participation trends, we would continue to meet and offer the chapter meeting to ourselves and all others to come and join in shaping it as a meaningful space for themselves and others.

The discussion veered towards acknowledgment externally, and the relative value we place on our self and work in light of it being acknowledged externally; we explored and shared our own attitudes and needs towards that, spoke about exploring frameworks that help us understand this better, like Firo and Enneagrams. Also, interestingly, because Shashi Kapoor was in the cafe, sitting undisturbed in his wheelchair, listening to the flute player, we also explored what would propel us or stop us from approaching him and expressing our appreciation for him and his genre of work. It became an engaging discussion because among the three there were different approaches, and we discovered the polar attitudes of reaching out unabashedly to express what I feel (Arun), to the "inverted snobbery" of feeling I am not one of the crowd of your mobbing fans, so I'd rather stay away and not disturb you (Priya & Vinti). That, of course, led us to explore many linkages essentially stemming from the same feeling..and brought out some amazing and funny anecdotes..

Each of us felt a deep sense of kinship, comraderie and wellness during and after the meeting. It was a regular, loose-agenda, "catch up" type meeting, and very relaxed.

The next chapter meeting will be held on April 16, 2010 from 7 to 9 p.m. A reminder and details of the venue will be sent out in the first week of April.

Bengaluru Chapter meet - 12th march 2010

2010-03-08T16:20:00.000+05:30

we are meeting on Friday the 12th March between 6.30 and 9.0 p.m.. Alok has
confirmed and has included Deepa as well. What about others? please do send a
yes or a no at least.

The meeting will be at 2053, Prestige Wellington Park apartments, Nos. 1 & 2 IAF
Main Road, Gangamma circle,, Bengaluru 560013. This is north west bengaluru and
the direction is as follows:

Please take the outer ring road, cross hebbal fly over, next crossing at BEL
circle - turn right from there, come straight for 1 or 1.5 km. and the building
is on your left. for any clarification, please call 9845564848 or 9845146561.

some of our regular members like Arundhati, Vishnu and Sophie have become busy
with the respective life spaces; what about others, where are you guys?

any new ideas about the meeting? what would we like to do? would anyone like
to bring someone new?

please let me know.

looking forward to hearing from you

regards

Sharbori

Mumbai chapter meeting - Feb 26, 2010

2010-02-17T18:48:00.001+05:30

After a brief hibernation, the Sumedhas Mumbai Chapter is back with a chapter meeting in February 2010. The details of the meeting are below:

Date: February 26, 2010
Time: 7 to 9 p.m. (we will begin and end the meeting on time, so please plan your availability accordingly)
Venue: The Cafe @ Prithvi Theatre, Janki Kutir, Juhu, Mumbai - 400049

Please RSVP to:
Priya Malhotra: on 09967025897 or at priyamalhotra1@gmail.com
Arun Nabar: on 09820372425 or at arun_nabar@rediffmail.com
Vinti Mehta: on 09870149448 or at vintimehta@gmail.com
by February 24, 2010

Please feel free to bring along people who may be curious about and interested in process work. Visiting Sumedhians are most welcome to join.

http://www.sumedhas.org/

Mumbai chapter meeting - notes

2009-09-17T13:51:00.001+05:30

Posted on behalf of the members who were present.

We had the Second Sumedhas Mumbai chapter meeting on the 12th Sept.

Present: Atul Deshpande, Priya Malhotra, Sangeeta Mathur, and Sanjay Doctor.

Though we were few of us, we had an enriching discussion. The key points discussed were:
* We discussed ways to make the chapter meeting convenient for many more members to attend; A suggestion was to hold an annual dinner and invite all the Mumbai members for a get-together; Another suggestion was to have a joint meeting with our Pune members at a mutually convenient location (Lonavala/Khandala);
* We shared our experience of our internship program and how it had left us at the end of the internship; a discussion on the instrumentality and the subjectivity of process work took place;
* We discussed the value of process work for diagnosis in an OD assignment; the reflexion required for a OD consultant is helped by process lab growth
* Members who are in phase 2 internship in the IAOD-S programs shared their experiences and how they had benefited from the program;
* There was a wish to screen the Hindi film, ‘Bawarchi’, to examine the character played by Rajesh Khanna as an OD consultant and which would bring out how the individual transforms the family and gets everyone connected.
* We concluded the meeting by reviewing what we had gone through during the meeting using a mind mapping exercise. The value of using a mind map was also discussed amongst the members.

We look forward to having many more members attending our next meeting scheduled during the month of November. Dates will be circulated later.

Delhi Chapter Meet - 19th Sept 09

2009-09-15T20:51:00.000+05:30

http://www.sumedhas.org/
Hello everyone!
A reminder that our chapter meet will be on the 19th this month (NOT the 4th Saturday)
Time: 4 pm
Venue: Sushanta's office
Look forward to see everyone!

Film about the Mumbai 26/11 attacks

2009-09-10T17:46:00.002+05:30

i saw this documentary on the mumbai 26/11 attacks. unsensational, very sobering. made me deeply sad and full of grief once again. and the only word that fights to escape is a child-like wail of confused grief - WHY?

http://europenews.dk/en/node/24746

Mumbai chapter meeting - Sep 12, 2009

2009-09-03T12:37:00.001+05:30

The next Mumbai chapter meeting is scheduled for September 12, 2009 between 1 - 5 p.m. at Sanjay Doctor's home. His home address and wikimapia link to his home are as follows:
Address -
13th floor, Flat 131, Dadar Silver Beach Apts
Jambhekar Lane
Off Suryavanshi Hall Lane,
Veer Savarkar Marg (Cadell Road)
Link -
http://wikimapia.org/#lat=19.0240942&lon=72.8335968&z=18&l=0&m=b&search=silver%20beach%20

For RSVPs please contact:
Priya Malhotra at priyamalhotra1@gmail.com or +919967025897
Sanjay Doctor at sanjay.doctor@gmail.com or +919892000857
Vinti Mehta at vintimehta@gmail.com or +919870149448

Sumedhians visiting from other geographies are more than welcome to join the meeting.

Delhi Chapter Meet - Aug 09

2009-08-31T00:08:00.002+05:30

The Delhi Chapter meet was held on 22nd August at Sushanto's office.
Attendees: Sushanto, Rachna, Anuja, Abha, Pooja, Shubha and Medha

In the July meet, while debating on ideas what to do at the next meeting, we had come up with a plan to explore "Symbolic Identities" and as a preparation for it had to write an autobiographical, mythological tale, so we went about our task and had loads of anxious moments and fun with it.
It all culminated on saturday in a day long session of tales and myths, facts and imagination, emotion and words, and some new understanding of ourselves, others, the world and also the concept and power of Symbolic Identity We started with sharing our experiences of writing our stories/ tales: the anticipation, excitement, joy, fear and anxieties and other emotions that the experience evoked. This sharing itself gave clues to the underlying identities. Then we went on to read out our tales, coming to an understanding of the symbolic identities underlying each one, through the tale itself, how we chose to tell it, and the choices we made in what to include and what not to.
We were helped along by a delicious lunch - thanks to Ashwini :) and ended with using our experiences to come to a better conceptual understanding of Symbolic identity, how it plays an integrative role and offers us direction for development.'
It was a very enriching and enjoyable session for all participants. The next meet is on 18th Sept 09 at 4.00 pm.

Power Dynamics and OD

2009-08-22T16:05:00.004+05:30

Thread: Power Inequalities and OD

§ Started by: Ashok Malhotra (ashokmal9@gmail.com)

Looking at power forces within a systemic framework, one finds that the basic distributive frame identified by Ashok is the resultant of power between those that hold greater power – the powerful ‘Actor’ and those that don’t – those ‘Acted upon’. This, then results in, or is a result of, hierarchies, command structures and many-to-one process mappings. This may be termed as Plane X. The resultant vector on Plane X is the dynamic power map between the actors and the acted-upon.

Organisation, the entity that provides the internal environment for the actor and acted-upon also has a power equation with them and the other stakeholders (part of the ecosystem). The power play is around the issue of the primary task and purpose of the organisation and therefore the entire system. Espoused theories held by the actors, the acted-upon and the stakeholders all come together and collude to create mission statements, visions that are statements held by the collective as the official view. These have evolved to proclaim aspirational qualities to stakeholder sensitivity, all the way to being responsible for the planet.

However the theory-in-action of the actors and the acted-upon is different to the espoused belief. It is naturalistic, primevial and self-serving. Self-growth and development, resource mobilisation for the self and the projection of the extended self in the primary system (family) and secondary systems (clan, tribe) are fundamental human processes. A degree of participation, engagement and efficiency with the espoused organisation task and vision is provided to create a stable condition for the self with the environment.

This is a power play between the organisation on one side and the counter pull of those at Plane X. Here the organisation becomes the acted-upon and those at Plane X become the actors. A subordinated Grade IV employee at plane X can be a strong power holder with the organisation when efforts to work towards the espoused task or purpose are not acted upon. Industrial unrest, unionism, collective bargaining and conscious inefficiency are tools that enhance this power. The power of an agent to refuse to work for the primary task of the organisation and due correction by those in the higher power level is dynamic. This is termed as Plane Y. The resultant vector on Plane Y is the dynamic power play between espoused purpose and theory-in-action for the organisation.

With the OD intervention, the OD consultant enters into the matrix. Now the practicioner exerts a power vis à vis the system. This power is generally associative when the OD intervention idea is commissioned by the top-level hierarchy to further the espoused purpose, efficiency and the theory-in-action objective of their own power within the system and other self-fulfilling agendas. The OD practicioner then, through data mining, findings and recommendations, begins to acquire a systemic power node. There is also a probability that the OD practicioner may introject from the acted-upon and give voice to unspoken, unclaimed emotions and agendas or introject the power held in the collective. The other pull could be the tension between the OD practitioner’s espoused purpose (the client brief) and the theory-in-action of hidden agendas linked more to ‘pairing’ goals like creating utopian worlds; wished for realities. This is the plane Z.

The resultant power vector held in a 3-plane dimensional space is a map of tensions in the system.

* * *

The apparent response would be to look at inequalities and work to minimizing them. An emergent view suggests that:

Human beings live with power in different planes with resultant vectors that are a function of the forces acting upon them in a particular plane.. However they are able to compensate the loss of power at one plane by naturally increasing their power in another plane. This could be a fundamental pre-requisite for them to survive with the system. It could also co-relate with the first law of thermodynamics that the net energy in a system is constant.

This would imply that the power of a systemic agent denoted as function f_xyz ={Power_x, Power_y, Power_z, Power_n} is a null set (zero sum).

* * *

Notes - Mumbai chapter meeting: Aug 1, 2009

2009-08-06T14:04:00.004+05:30

We had a Sumedhas chapter meeting in Mumbai after the longest time – and it was great reconnecting with Sumedhians! Here are the meeting notes:

Present: Aneeta Madhok , Anuradha Shah, Atul Deshpande, Biren (B.P.) Singh, Dhanaluxmi Kandappah, Priya Malhotra, Sangeeta Mathur, Sanjay Doctor, Sarojani Gaikwad, Vinti Mehta

Broad themes of discussion:

What does the Sumedhas chapter meet space mean to us? What drew each of us for the meet? What would each of us like the chapter meet space to be?
* One in which the journey of self-reflection can be continued, furthered and supported by each other
* One that provides relatedness and relationships with people who are on the journey of self-reflection
* One in which we can share knowledge and learn from each other about any area that may be of interest to the group
* One in which we can express and BE ourselves in the here and now as authentically as possible
* Some concerns about boundaries were expressed; issues of inclusion and exclusion were discussed a few times; we agreed that answers to these questions would emerge as we continue to meet and evolve
* Key interlinked questions that we explored (and will continue to) are “What is the purpose of the chapter meet? What would we like it to be? Who forms the ‘we’, therefore? Who’s in/ out? etc.”
* We also talked briefly about what and how we would like to contribute to Sumedhas, being a part of the larger community, while being whole in ourselves

Personal sharing of data as well as patterns:
* Most of us shared what’s been happening with us since the summer program this year
* Most of us also shared where we are in our lives currently and also what was happening to us as the chapter meet progressed

Next meeting:
* A general enthusiasm and an eagerness to connect formed the fabric of the meet even as we explored what would we co-create the the Sumedhas chapter meet space to be
* The next meeting is scheduled on September 12, 2009 between 1-5 p.m. at Sanjay Doctor’s house. Details with addresses, etc. will be sent out by the first week of September.

Mumbai chapter meeting

2009-07-28T16:17:00.001+05:30

hi all

the (after the longest time!) mumbai chapter meeting is scheduled for saturday august 1st, 2009. other details of the meeting:
time: 12 noon to 4 p.m.
venue: priya malhotra's home (thanks, priya!)
address is Flat 604, Belscot Building, Opp kamath club, Lokhandwala Complex, Andheri West. the map link is: http://wikimapia.org/#lat=19.1422897&lon=72.8284389&z=18&l=0&m=b&search=belscot%20building

we have emailed the sumedhians in mumbai whose contact details we had. if we've missed someone out, please forgive the lapse and send a confirmation saying you'd like to attend to:
Priya Malhotra at priyamalhotra1@gmail.com OR
Vinti Mehta at vintimehta@gmail.com

also, wandering sumedhians (visiting mumbaitown from other cities) are most welcome to join us as well!

best
vinti

http://www.sumedhas.org/

Delhi Chapter Meet- July

2009-07-20T00:35:00.001+05:30

http://www.sumedhas.org/
The Delhi Chapter Meet for the month is scheduled on July 25th, 4.00 pm at Sushant's office. Please join in.

Minutes of Delhi Chapter Meet - 27th June 09

2009-06-29T19:33:00.002+05:30

http://www.sumedhas.org/
A quick update from our meeting on Saturday
Present: Anuja, Medha, Pooja, Sushanta,Rachna
A. we discussed the need to keep a record of our meetings and also share them with the larger Sumedhas community. alternatives suggested were : the Sumedhas Blog, the recent E-group and also the Facebook community decisions taken:
1. we will circulate minutes after each meeting to this group (this is a start!)
2. as well as put them up (maybe an outline) on the blog http://sumedhas.blogspot.com/
3. the Facebook/ e-group can be a space to announce monthly meetings so that people across get to know and can choose to attend if they are around.
B. We all shared where we personally in our lives, looking also at our own reactions to different situations
C. We discussed the idea of weekend labs - maybe open labs that we could offer to the larger community to share costs. some ideas were discussed and we were all excited about this. Next steps: to concretize ideas, fix dates and take up roles in organizing this.
The next meeting will be on July 25th : look forward to seeing you all there.

2009-04-27T20:54:00.002+05:30

Folks,

Sushanta has sent the following message and the link. do take a look.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interesting discussion by a set of (presumably) americans.The interesting drama begins on p2.Do take a look.Quite revealing......

http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/28609695/m/120005666931/p/1

Space Time Continuum and Adoption (Love)

2009-03-04T08:12:00.002+05:30

Space time continuum is everywhere, even in our hearts. How we deal and interact with it is important. A basic rule that most humans firmly believe in is that only one thing can occupy a given space at an instant of time. So if i had two billiard balls only one will occupy a given space at an instant in time. So which billiard ball occupies that space will become a function of the amount of force (or power) that can be exerted to win and conquer that space. So i can love only one person and more importantly i must be the only person in the mind of someone who loves me. This causes much strain and may not be a practical way in Adoption.
Quantum physics says something very interesting. Its possible for multiple states to exist at the same time. So its possible for two things to occupy the same space in the same instant of time and yet not disturb each other. This is an amazing thing as far as adoption is concerned.

To use this approach is very interesting, in the love that adoptive parents feel for their children and also the strain of the child wanting to look for its natural parents, and its repercussions thereof. So what we are saying is that its possible for me to love somebody and include them entirely into my space. Also, at the same time, it is possible for someone else to occupy space within this child, and yet there is no threat to me or the continuum of my space time (love).

If one can adopt this way of thinking, the feasibility of sharing it with the child improves considerably. The child is going to have to migrate to this system anyway, as in its mind, there has to be space for two / multiple sets of parents. Can we help in their journey by allowing multiple states to exist at the same time, is the question?

atulmobile@rediffmail.com
http://www.sumedhas.org/

Survival

2009-03-03T00:39:00.002+05:30

Wrote something today. Want to share...

I bit my nail too hard,
to the end of the skin
And now, its bleeding!

I wore my shirt too tight,
to be who I'm not
And now, I am not breathing

I know who I am.
I know what this is,
And now, I'm waiting.

I shall bite my nail too hard, AGAIN.

Roop, 2nd March, 09.

Masculinity and initiation rites

2009-02-21T21:11:00.003+05:30

Chandana, Kaka, Anuradha and I met up a few days ago when Kaka was in Calcutta. In the course of the adda, Kaka brought up the issue of loss of initiation rites of young boys into manhood nowadays, the loss of connect between men and the 'primal man and his forest', the transformation of the 'forest' as a dangerous place, the swing in gender identity that the feminist movement may have brought about in some men who are more in connect with their femininity, the consequent fragmentation and lack of integration between the masculine and the feminine in men.

There is a spur in inquisition into 'masculinities' globally, in the development/ human rights sector. Part of this inquisition is legitimised by arguments of working with men and boys to help them support women's empowerment and help them to understand that by doing so, they are not emasculated or made powerless. But in reality, there are several interests that spear this inquiry.

Part of this movement (its too early to call it a 'movement') comes from those who wish to impress and promote the identity of the benevolent - who chooses not to use his physical strength to brutalise women, but to 'protect' them. The spearheads of this part of the movement calls upon men to condemn rape, domestic violence and all forms of physical, emotional and psychological violence against men, perpetrated by men.

There is another, and in my opinion more radical, part of the movement - which questions what it means to be a man, a male - the values it is based on and the meaning of those values. It informs people that the basic constructs of manhood (apart from the physiology of it) is constructed to promote and protect roles of men as providers and protectors, and therefore predators as well. Most initiation rites condemn femininity in men, and therefore encourages men to disown femininity in themselves, using threats of guilt and shame for transgressors.

In no culture is there a single masculine/ feminine identity in any culture - never was, and never is. There are dominant masculinity/ies, and ones that are less rewarded and more chastised. And male initiation processes in a patriarchal setup would necessarily include disowning of femininity. Fragmentation, in my belief, is not caused by lack of gender typification, it is caused by debasing of sexuality to hetero-normative sexuality and man's need to control women's sexuality for his own perceived needs.

Look forward to other reflections.

Dev.D and Sarat

2009-02-13T21:36:00.000+05:30

Dev.D and Sarat Chandra Chattopadhyay

While seeing the movie (Dev.D), particularly the first half, I kept thinking that if Sarat had the courage, this is the way he would etched out the characters of Devdas and Paro.

Devdas was his most popular but least acclaimed work. In fact, Sarat himself did not think much of it and was rather ashamed of it. The reason for this dichotomy, I think, was that he had taken up something potentially powerful (which led to Devdas acquiring the iconic status that it did) but did not have the maturity and the courage to actually develop it. We have to remember that the book was written by him when he was in his late teens and it was written in India of early twentieth century. Understandably, he had to make many compromises. On his own, I guess he would have liked to place the responsibility of Devdas’ tragedy squarely on his own ambivalence (particularly the conflict between his narcissism and his need for intimacy), but ended up using parental opposition and patriarchy as a cheap way out. I am glad that Dev.D has placed this issue directly where it belongs. There is enough evidence in his book to support such a hypothesis.

I think he saw in Paro, the confident, self anchored, vivacious woman who was so full of love that she was willing to pay any price for it except her dignity. To an extent, Sarat remained faithful to this construct except that in order to meet the social stereotypes of his time, he ended up making her into a martyr. Mercifully Dev.D departs from it and depicts her as a woman who is willing to make her choices and face their consequences. It also shows the courage to contemporize her if we regard her action of sending her topless photograph to her lover without any shame as an equivalent of what the original Paro did, by visiting Devdas alone in the night. In the film, Paro’s refusal to explain herself to Dev when he suspects her of infidelity and then her bashing up of the person who has sparked off this indignity, is something I am sure Sarat would have heartily approved of!

These themes in a man woman relationship continue to feature in all Sarat’s future works, though in a much more evolved manner. However, while the male characters remained virtually static, the female characters continue to evolve. This evolution can be seen through the characters of “Kiranmoyee” of “Charitraheen”, “Rajlakshmi” of “Srikant” and finally of course the most beautiful of them all, “Kamal/Shibani” of “ Sesh Proshno”. Why his male characters did not go through such a similar evolution, remains a mystery.

The film looses the plot a little bit after Paro’s wedding. It does not capture Chandramukhi either in her own right or as a counter point to Paro as Sarat had attempted. Nonetheless, both Paro and Chanda as she is called in the film, keep putting Dev in his place. The final movement away from self destruction though a bit contrived, is a welcome departure from the traditional Devdas stereotype, particularly since it entails a willingness to surrender to the female authority.

if Sarat was to see Dev.D, he would probably say to himself “at last, I have been understood. It was never my intention to create an icon out of an over sentimental and self destructive person. All I wanted to do was to raise some basic questions about ourselves, particularly in the context of man-woman relationship. In many ways, this film has done that and in a sense transcended many of my compulsions and collusions.”

Power Inequities and OD

2009-01-26T17:36:00.003+05:30

Power is both distributive (zero sum) and integrative (non zero sum). Parties involved in a power relationship not merely gain power at the cost of each other, but can also enhance their own power through enhancing the power of the other. By and large, most OD theory and practice is based on the integrative aspect of power relations. However the distributive aspect can not be wished away. Thus while the OD practitioner may not directly engage with the distributive aspect, some assumptions in this regard are inevitable

Inequity in power distribution is perhaps one of the most significant contributors to processes of dehumanization in any human collectivity - families, work groups, organizations or societies. Since theory and practice of OD, by definition has to engage with human processes, there is no way these power inequities can be side stepped. Even when the primary focus of the OD effort is to enhance the performance, efficiency and effectiveness of the system, the impact of power structure on the behavioural dimension has to be taken into account. Thus, directly or indirectly every theory and practice of OD is based upon some assumptions/ideologies in respect of power inequities and consequent dehumanization.

The unbridled exploitation of the weak by the strong, and the abject subservience of the weak towards the strong are the obvious forms of this dehumanization but are perhaps only the proverbial tips of the ice berg. The process of dehumanization runs much deeper and influences the very fundamental ways in which we think and relate with ourselves and others. Some of these processes are described below

The duality of “part” and “whole”

All entities are whole in themselves as also a part of a larger whole. However power structure plays a crucial role in determining what would be regarded as whole and what as a mere part. People and groups who are in a favourable power situation often over emphasise their wholeness and overlook their part hood. On the other hand, they tend to expect responsible part hood from those who are in unfavourable power situation and remain blind to the fact they are “whole” in themselves. Thus a privileged individual/social group/nation does not often see its own irresponsible behaviour through disproportionate consumption of resources but becomes rather vigilant about the irresponsible acts of the underprivileged, say through disturbing the social and ecological balance.

This process provides moral tenability to sacrifice of the interest of the less powerful people and groups in the name of “larger good”. Just as amputation of a limb can be justified for preservation of life, downsizing can be justified for ensuring the survival and prosperity of the total organization. Simultaneously the impact of such downsizing on yet another larger whole (society) of which the organization is a mere part, can be overlooked unless of course there is a shift in the balance of power. The recent retrenchment and subsequent reinstatement of staff by a prominent Air line in India is a telling example of this process.

The omnipotent/impotent split

Power differences tend to perpetuate and reinforce themselves. We all know the significance of striking the first blow and thereby gaining crucial psychological advantage. Thus it is not surprising that parties who are locked into an unequal power balance often attribute omnipotence and impotence to themselves as also to the other depending upon how they are placed in the power equation. People who are placed lower in the power structure tend to view the powerful ones as “gods” or “demons” and generally find it difficult to accept their humanness. At the same time they may see themselves as “helpless victims” or “obedient children” who have no choices other than those permitted to them by the powers that be. On the other hand, people in powerful positions find it extremely difficult to acknowledge any limitation or vulnerability even to themselves and thus keep the myth of omnipotence/impotence alive. This process makes any authentic human encounter either with the “self” or with the other into an impossibility.

Price and value gulf

Power structure of a collectivity significantly impacts the relative valuation of skills, competencies, attributes, preferences and the like. Implicit belief is that people and groups who are more powerful are also in some ways superior human beings and thus their proclivities deserve to be priced at higher levels ( for example, proficiency in English deserves a higher price tag than proficiency in a regional language or that masculine attributes deserve a higher price tag than feminine attributes etc. etc.) Since price is a function of market dynamics and the powerful group has greater control over market forces, the pricing levels are often determined by their interests rather than intrinsic value. In that sense, free economy is hardly free. Even in day to day living, generally the value attached to an idea depends heavily on how it is received by the powers that be rather than its intrinsic worth.

Confusion of levels

Human beings operate simultaneously at different levels (physical, social, mental, emotional, spiritual etc) Power relations play an important role in determining the level at which an issue is understood and engaged with. As Swami Vivekananda had said “there is nothing more dehumanizing than offering a spiritual discourse to a hungry person” Thus mixing of levels not merely allows the powerful to free themselves of guilt ( we are doing our best) it also burdens the powerless with additional guilt and shame ( there must be something wrong with us) A poignant illustration of this phenomenon was shown in the popular Hindi film “Taare Zamin Par” where the physical deficiency of a child is understood by the parents as an emotional issue and/or lack of will power. At a more mundane level, it is not uncommon to see organizations engaging with essentially structural issue through “attitude change” or attempting to engage with emotive issues through monetization.

Implications for OD

What has been stated above is by no means an exhaustive list of pathologies arising out of inequitable power relations. The central point is that many of the pathologies which the OD practitioner wishes to address are at least partly arising out of inequities of power relations. As stated earlier the main thrust in OD is to enhance the integrative dimension of power relations. Consequently, the assumptions and stances towards the distributive aspect are rarely stated directly other than being condemned in a normative way. However, the normative condemnation does not take away their reality and the necessity of engaging with them. Hence it is only through the nature of the engagement that we can infer the stance of any OD theory or practice in respect of distributive power relations. What follows is the author’s understanding and experience of different brands of OD and their respective stances towards distributive power relations. Since these stances are often not part of the stated position, they are heavily influenced by the proclivities of the individual practitioner. To that extent, the classification can also be seen as one of practitioners rather than that of theory and practice.

Instrumental OD

The basic assumption of instrumental OD is that “organization is an artificial entity created for fulfillment of a purpose” Thus it is essentially an instrument and the basic goal of OD is to enhance the efficacy of this instrument. The dehumanization is not directly a part of its agenda but only to the extent that impairs this effectiveness. This brand of OD is most comfortable with tools and techniques, measurement and specificity of goals, targets and process. Generally, it has low tolerance for philosophy/perspective and concerns itself primarily with pragmatics.

The unstated stance of this brand of OD is that since organization is a mere instrument, its owners have every right to use it as they deem fit so long as they are operating within the law of the land. Hence its allegiance is firmly with the powers that be and its endeavour is to further enhance their power both in an integrative manner and in a distributive manner. The dehumanization arising out of power inequities is treated as a problem and generally sought to be corrected through new systems, upgradation of competence and change of attitudes.

The main problem this brand of OD runs into, is two fold. Firstly, since it turns its face away from the basic processes of dehumanization, it can at best contain the resultant pathology. The same issues keep coming up again and again in newer forms. It is thus not surprising that this brand of OD needs a continuous supply of “new improved version in a new improved package” which is usually nothing more than the same old wine in a new bottle.

The second problem arises from the fact that in order to exploit the integrative potential, the co-operation of the powerless is necessary. Hence the allegiance to the powerful can not be directly owned up and must be masked behind the right kind of political rhetoric. This generates a split between the stated position and the operative position leading to loss of credibility particularly in the eyes of the powerless. Thus it is not uncommon to find people referring to HRD as human resource destruction.

Sermonic OD

The basic assumption behind this brand of OD is that “the organization is also a human collectivity in which power inequities are inevitable. However they need not come in the way of living with dignity and mutual respect” This is akin to the basic assumption behind the much maligned, abused and misused caste system. If, all Individuals and group were to follow their respective dharma then a state of perfect harmony can be achieved. Thus unlike instrumental OD this brand of OD is directly concerned with the issue of dehumanization and therefore endeavours (at least theoretically) to place itself at an equidistant location between the powerful and powerless. Generally, the emphasis in this kind of OD is on values, norms and mechanisms to ensure adherence to them. The OD practitioner takes up the role of a preacher cum conscience keeper.

One of the problems with this kind of OD is that its feasibility rests on exercise of self-restraint by all parties. The powerful are expected to act in the Gandhian spirit of “trusteeship” rather than the capitalistic spirit of “ownership” Also the powerless are expected to accept their situation in a spirit of harmonious co-existence and limit their striving for betterment only within permissible limits. Since this self-restraint is more an exception than the rule, in practice, this brand of OD becomes akin to a moral sermon which is good to hear but almost impossible to practice. Worse still, since it has a soothing effect it acts like what Marx would have called “the opium of the masses”.

The main problem of course is that de-facto it aligns with the powerful. Partly due to the fact that the powerful can control as to what sermons are “safe” to be delivered and which ones are potentially hazardous and must be edited out; and partly because by its very nature its challenge is restricted to the processes of dehumanization and not the inequitable power relationship. Thus in effect the dehumanization remains in place and even deteriorates over time as in the case of caste system.

Dole out OD

This brand of OD recognizes the dysfunctionalities of power inequities and hence reduction of power distance becomes one of its explicit goals. This is sought to be achieved through making the “powerful” realize that the power inequities are equally destructive to them and hence it is in their own enlightened self interest to reduce the power distance. Thus, democratization, participation, empowerment etc. are some of the key themes which this brand of OD engages with.

Given its basic premise that power distance can only be reduced by choices and actions of the “powerful”, its dependence on powers that be is almost total. “OD begins at top” is a maxim applicable to all types of OD but particularly so to this variety. Note for instance that instrumental OD requires only rational acceptance of the powers that be, and sermonic OD needs an emotive appeal, however, this brand of OD requires to be owned up both at rational and emotive levels.

The main difficulty with this brand of OD is that it further reinforces the omnipotent/impotent split. The belief that empowerment has to be doled out by the powerful to the powerless creates its own set of problems. Firstly it keeps the powerless locked into a recipient location (what can I do unless my boss consults me, kind of syndrome); secondly the frame from which empowerment is doled out remains with the powerful (almost like papa will decide as to how much and what kind of say the children can have) Thus often this brand of OD acquires a patronizing flavor and becomes a means through which the ways of the “powerful” are sought to be perpetuated.

Agentic OD

The basic assumption of Agentic OD is that all human beings are free agents. While every individual has to necessarily deal with the imperatives and inevitabilities of his/her context, dignified existence entails taking responsibility for one self, making choices and accepting their consequences. In this respect it does not make any distinction between “powerful” and “powerless” Both are victims of their respective context and have to deal with dehumanizing forces in their own ways. Thus the dehumanization of power inequity is side stepped in a structural sense and confronted in the personal domain of the individual. The endeavour is for the individual to enhance his/her “personal authority” to find a release from the captivity of the processes of dehumanization. This is achieved through interventions such as sensitivity training, group relations conference, personal growth labs and the like; wherein the individual can get a better insight into his/her internal processes as also collective processes which impact him/her. The hope is that such insights will help the individual to carve out a more dignified and meaningful existence at personal and collective levels.

Just as the feasibility of Sermonic OD rests on exercise of self-restraint, the feasibility of Agentic OD rests on a high degree of individuation and autonomy, which is rarely the case. Also by definition its impact is restricted to the individual level where also it rarely goes beyond gaining a few insights. Translation of insights into action becomes difficult because action is a function of both the “self” and the “situation”. Thus often the individual is either left with disillusionment ( what can you do when every one else is colluding) or a feeling of self-blame ( I am not Agentic/courageous enough) The net result is that this brand of OD rarely makes an impact at the collective level particularly in respect of reconfiguring power relations.

Revolutionary OD

This brand of OD directly confronts the issues of power inequities, and unlike other brands it openly aligns itself with the “powerless” and attempts to change the balance of power. It rejects the empowerment of the “dole out” variety and seeks to make the “powerless” more aware of their real situation as also potential through processes such as “conscientization” Here the basic assumption is that issue of power inequities can only be addressed through collective awareness and action. Since it poses a challenge to the existing order, it rarely finds direct entry into organizational spaces where the “gate keeping” function is necessarily performed by the powers that be. Hence largely its sphere is in the field of “social action” except occasionally when it insidiously seeps into organizational spaces. Its essential commonality with other brands of OD is that they draw from the same pool of knowledge viz. Behavioural Science.

Besides the obvious problems of entry into organizational spaces, there is another difficulty with this brand of OD. More often than not, the existing power inequity is replaced by another power inequity as has happened time and again in human history. In a sense this is a paradox of restoration of human dignity through collective action. Collective action requires people to surrender their autonomy and subjective wisdom for the collective cause which then invites a new source of oppression and dehumanization.

Looking Forward
The picture painted so far is rather dismal. It would seem that OD has no viable response to the issue of power inequities and consequent dehumanization. By no means, this is confined to OD alone but for those of us who regard “human dignity” as central pivot of OD, it is a painful reality to acknowledge. No one knows (at least I don’t) where the answers lie, but it is reasonably clear that some fundamental assumptions will need to be revisited.

At the end of cold war many people thought that the challenge to capitalism is over, but subsequent developments have shown otherwise. In fact what is becoming increasingly obvious is that the real enemy of capitalism was not communism but its own inherent contradictions. Admittedly, communism failed in providing a viable alternative but that does not mean that the problems of capitalism are over. Some of its consequences like looking at the world as essentially a market place, looking at one self as a product, primacy of “having” over “being; and looking at human encounters as transactional exchanges; are so dehumanizing that search for dignity within its confines is a near impossibility. What lies ahead we do not know, but surely capitalism can not be the final answer to human condition.

This has significant implications for OD. Within the confines of unbridled capitalism there is a very real danger of OD itself becoming a captive of the dysfunctionalities of the market place. It will end up providing that which “sells” rather than that which is “needed”. The pressure to prove its own viability as a contributor to success and competitiveness will make it extremely difficult for it to take a “non-collusive” stance. A significant source of collusion stems from the propensity to classify phenomenon as “problems” and then use OD to eliminate them. Systemic phenomena serve multiple purposes and hence have different meanings for different parts of the system. Often phenomenon which are troublesome for the powers that be and/or are seen by them as impediments to organizational competitiveness (for example indiscipline, low morale, employee turnover etc.) get classified as “problems” and are sought to be addressed through OD interventions. In this process not merely the significance of the phenomenon for the rest of the system gets lost, even meaningful resolution becomes impossible. To that extent, problem centricity is not merely collusive and dehumanizing but also self-defeating.

Perhaps the search for OD paradigms which can address the indignities arising out of power inequities can begin with engagement with phenomenon rather than problems. Undoubtedly, “problem solving” helps in gaining brownie points from the powers that be (as can be seen in the recent strong endorsement of the Gujarat Chief Minister by several industry leaders for solving various problems which were seen blocking the business and industrial growth). However, solving of these problems does not necessarily help in improving the well being and health of the total system as is indicated in the National Family Health Survey of the state. In order to build credibility, the OD practioner has to demonstrate some problem solving capability. In so doing, she/he must also ask – whose problem is it? What interests are at stake? And, who is likely to pay for the proposed solutions? Not doing so, will only add to the process of collusion.

Am I sensitive enough?

2009-01-02T16:24:00.003+05:30

http://www.sumedhas.org/
With all the new year wishes poring in - I renewed my respect for the sheer positive energy we have around us. We seem to be in a hurry to get over with whatever is unpleasant in life and make it as happy and cheerful as possible .
Somehow the cynic in me worries about it.. as it also worries about a very important topic that I would like some more opinions on this...

When I see the deluge of hate and violence in this world - it takes me by surprise. No matter how often it happens - it still shocks me. Like all of us - I try to see what happens in the micro-world that I inhibit - are there some seeds of the same phenomenan that creates such madness?

I see that seed . I see it everywhere. That seed is insensitivity. It is sowed in every human being and colors all our behavioural patterns by the time we are adults. In fact - we are rarely aware of how insensitive we are.

Sensitivity is the God-given compass with which all of us are born. More than written ethics and religious codes of conduct - it creates an inborn empathy that tells us to care for people around us.

However - througout our life - we try to fight sensitivity and to unlearn it. We grow up to be worldly-wise. We accept disparities around us with complete ease . It's rarely a topic of conversations or of action.

Insensitivity goes by several names - all these names we are familiar with .We go to great lengths to teach these to our children and stamp out the naive sensitivity that they are born with.

Discipline, Professional behavior , Practicality - all have elements of insensitivity lodged into them. Discipline makes punishments legitimate, Professional behavior makes it legitimate to treat people in organizations like inanimate objects . And Practicality - the most powerful of all words - can make almost any thing sound right and legitimate.

There are a great many other names too - with the same basic root - insensitivity.

Feed insensitivity with enough rage and give it a cause - 'rightful struggle' by any name - and we have the recipe for violence. Insensitivity is the edge with which the sword of violence cuts into the flesh of fellow human beings.

I am of course painfully aware that behind the facade of so-called modern civilization we inhabit a world where Darwinian priciples of survival hold true. And I am aware that extreme sensitivity can make it impossible to survive. And yet - since God has gone to such lengths to endow every new-born with sensitivity I am certain it has it's place in this world.

This year - 2009 - I resolve take whatever steps I can to strengthen my sensitivity, my vulnerability and act on it with courage. I resolve to leave my fears behind and trust my intution and values.

And I hope that throughout the world people are sensitive in small ways.. and tilt the world towards goodness and humanity.

I wish all of us a new year that brings more peace, joy and wisdom in our lives.

-Sumedha

A wish for you, from me!

2009-01-01T22:20:00.002+05:30

Here is a personal note to all co-travellers and friends...

This new year's eve,
Makes me pensive,
I count and re-count the year gone by,
what, how and why.

The customary car, or phone greeting,
No matter how fleeting
I iterate and re-iterate 'happy new year
May all your wishes come true, my dear!'

Receive short messages on my phone,
forward some, save a few for moments alone,
Leaves me wondering what I desire
from yet another new year...

Give up vices, climb new stairs
doubtful or pragmatic promises
Where do I want to go from here?
Where do I wish to go from here?

If wants were wishes, and wishes were to be,
I'd crave to be on a journey
with a body no more, a soul set free
rid of fear of what may be, become of me

To all my people in various circles
I wish you ask yourself questions
Wish yourself for who you wish to be
and consider those wishes for you, from me!

Roop Sen
29th Dec, 2008

note from Rotraut RoyChowdhury - Psychoanalyst, Samikshani

2008-12-12T21:52:00.005+05:30

Dear All, I am posting a note from Rotraut Roychowdhury, which she sent in response to one of Ashok's article. Rotraut is an eminent Psychoanalyst, one of the founders of Samikshani (Association of Psychoanalysts, Psychotherapists and Psychiatrists in Kolkata), Founder of Dr Tarun Sinha Trust, Kolkata, a wonderful and compassionate human being and a loving teacher to many of us.

This note details her anguish and tremendous anger at our own apathy towards ourselves, our society, social order and the vandalism that goes on right under our nose. you may like to respond to her directly at tsmtrust@gmail.com.
==================================================================
Dear Ashok,
Thank you for forwarding your own and Anita Ratnam's mails. The anguish over what is happening ever more close to our homes is generating analyses and soul-searching. There will be variants of views, but desperate questions like 'How could it happen?' and 'where do we go from here?' are on most (?) people's minds.

That it took this magnitude of events and public blow-by-blow accounts to arouse such intense responses, also says something. In a world and within nations divided since time immemorial into hierarchies of rulers and vanquished, of castes, social groups, communities, haves, havenots and of genders, history has been full of most primitive barbaric genocides, torture, cruelty, suppression, indoctrination, exploitation of vulnerable young people and near-extermination of the weakest groups without a hint of regret or remorse (exceptions proving the rule). Negative energies have been stored with ever-increasing volatility, quantitatively the deprived, suppressed, illtreated outnumbering the rest a million times. What's added now is technological finesse and destructive weapons with the power to blow up the planet altogether. The mindset has not changed, primitive, infantile, indoctrinated dehumanized agents of mentors, who defy adequate verbal description.

What you are saying about individuals and collectives, I agree. As a society (replicated worldwide) we have tacitly promoted intolerance, violence, humiliation, lack of respect for life and the living, we have supported 'honour killings', unspeakable, poverty, hardship, torture and ghastly brutality in homes and our rural hinterlands. We have seen no reason to change our modes of upbringing, our educational systems, our permissives for sexual outrages within families and as weapons of war, accepted implicitly 'everyday' expressions, of dehumanized / dehumanizing rituals, customs, superstitions, vested interests maintaining poverty (with attending ill-health, high rates of maternal mortality, abused and neglected children growing into wayward delinquents), ignorance, deprivation, numbing suffering of enormous dimensions right next to our doorsteps. We have seen no reason to avert the raising of millions of potential 'terrorists'. We get alarmed only, when today's revolts by the aggrieved is powered by money and powerful destructive weapons that can strike your home and mine. – What did we expect, 'secure' in our power to retain the status quo over centuries, to fool all the people for all time to come? We decry murderous, satanic politicians – who raised them? – all common next-door people, outgrowths of our 'social systems', which are full of their mini-versions in every dwelling. As a people gets the government it deserves, we vote criminals and murderers into positions of power, violence begets violence, and it gets bigger and bigger and bigger.

Whilst individual efforts are valuable and will hopefully multiply, the complex global scenario is a juggernaut, with unbelievable disasters a clear possibility. The so-called terrorists are mere brainwashed pawns in the hands of local and global players – and collectively we've all helped to raise them, (the pawns and the big players), and are continuing to raise them generation after generation – by commission and omission – the seeds sown over centuries are bearing fruit inexorably. We refused to see the writings on everyone's wall, like the Navy denied having received warnings. The scale of current events is a clear indicator that the perpetrators are strategic operators. I / we don't know, what they really 'want'. But to enlarge the psychological concept of 'deficit pathology' – a pathological state of mind resulting from deficits in nurturing – its main symptoms are uncontrollable rage, inability to form emotional bonds and durable relationships, insatiable craving and demands to be given everything they ask for. And its never 'enough', because the original 'deficit' or 'void' can never be filled. It's like a bottomless pit …. The picture isn't rosy, in every village, in every continent, micro to macro, force and counterforce, cause and effect – the Genie has been out of the bottle since a long, long time.
Regards, Rotraut
4.12.08

Letter from Dubai

2008-12-12T21:47:00.004+05:30

I am posting an article written by Mr. Aizaz Zaka Sayeed of Khaleej Times. It makes an interesting read: you may like to write to him directly. his email i.d. is given below.
sharabori

Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 15:14:12 +0530From: greenwich.ent@gmail.comTo:

Fwd: INTERESTING PLEASE read ---- FROM MD. OOMER SAIT

The origin of all religion is perhaps one and the same.......
No Time to Hide for Muslims
Aijaz Zaka Syed (View from Dubai) 30 November 2008

Watching the terror nightmare unfold in Mumbai over the past three days with me on television, my kids have repeatedly asked me: "Who are these terrorists and why are they doing this?" And every time I wished I could offer them a convincing answer.
What could I tell them? For one, I was equally clueless why these guys had taken over India's financial and cultural capital and were targeting people who had nothing to do with them and had done nothing to harm them.
For two, I was too ashamed to tell them these guys were ostensibly Muslims and came from a country that was created in the name of Islam.
At work, while my colleagues went about covering the madness in Mumbai and laying out special pages with the images of the incredibly beautiful hotel, Taj, with its Islamic arches and domes, go up in smoke, I find it hard to look my colleagues in the eye.
And this happens all the time. Every time innocents are targeted in the name of Islam around the world, one can't face one's non-Muslim friends and colleagues. I feel like burying myself in the ground. Growing up in a religious family, one never thought one would see the day when being a Muslim could be a source of shame.
A distraught friend who has devoted her life to speaking and fighting on behalf of Arabs and Muslims wrote in yesterday saying "I've had it with the Arabs and Muslims and Islamic militancy. Forgive me but I am throwing in the towel."
I couldn't write back to her but understood her pain. She grew up in Mumbai and is understandably upset.
My friend went on to say: "The Muslims and Islam have a problem and only they can solve it. If they do not, the whole world will turn against them."
If this is how our most loyal friends feel, imagine the sentiments and reactions of the rest of the world. Can you blame the world if it's turning against Muslims? What do you expect when not a single day passes without the name of our faith being dragged through the mud by fellow believers around the world?
How many innocents have to die in the name of Islam before Muslim leaders and countries take effective action to deal with the nuts, who are out to destroy us all with their nihilistic cult?
I know that the Muslim leaders including those in the highest echelons of power have lately started speaking out against the extremists.
Darul Uloom Deoband in India, one of the oldest and most respected centres of learning in the Muslim world, issued a fatwa against terrorism at a large gathering of Islamic scholars and leaders in June. Last month, nearly 5,000 scholars backed the edict at a huge congregation in Hyderabad.
The OIC, the organisation of Muslim states, and Saudi Arabia, the leader of the Arab-Islamic world, have of late been equally vehement in condemning these repulsive acts of violence targeting innocents.
Eminent Muslim intellectuals and journalists like Tariq Ramadan, a grandson of Muslim Brotherhood founder Hasan Al Banna, and India's MJ Akbar and numerous others too have repeatedly protested this distortion of Islamic teachings and spirit.
These calls of conscience on behalf of mainstream Islam have however proved voices in the wilderness. Clearly, we need to do more to be heard by the world and to stop this shameful victimisation of innocent people in the name of religion.
The great irony of the Mumbai attacks is the killing of Anti-Terrorism Squad chief Hemant Karkare and his colleagues. Karkare, a brave and decorated officer investigating the Malegaon blasts and other recent terror attacks that he established to be the handiwork of Hindu extremists, not Muslim groups like SIMI, was killed by the terrorists outside Cama hospital Wednesday night. Obviously, Muslims do not know who their real friends and enemies are. And, pray, why is India increasingly being singled out for this savagery? What do they think this country is? A Hindu country or an anti-Muslim nation?
Do the ignorant dummies repeatedly being sent out on the so-called jihad know that this great country is home to the world's largest Muslim population? Almost twice the size of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan! India's greatest superstar is a Muslim, not to mention the countless achievers in other fields.
Why are our friends across the border bent on destroying the whole world with themselves? Is this what Islam and the noble Prophet teach and stand for?
It's all very well for us to say Islam has nothing to do with extremism and terrorism. We can go on deluding ourselves these psychopaths do not represent us.
However, the world finds it hard to accept this line of argument because it sees the extremists increasingly assert themselves and take the centre-stage while the mainstream Islam remains silent.
The great religion that preaches and celebrates universal brotherhood, equality of men and peace and justice for all has been hijacked by a demented, miniscule minority. And, as my friend says, only Muslims can solve this problem. Only Muslims can confront these anarchists in their midst.
Only they can get their faith freed from the clutches of extremism. This is no time to hide. It's time to stand up and speak out. For the terrorists will continue to speak on our behalf, until we do not speak up. This is no time for silence. Enough is enough!
For comments and suggestions, please write to aijaz@khaleejtimes.com

My Mild Attempt

2008-12-12T10:08:00.002+05:30

I had sent the following mail to the editor of NDTV. I was not sure if it would have any effect. However, I thought they might appreciate the semiotic parallels between the TV Channels and the politics they were commenting upon!

Dear Editor,

I am not writing to critisise. I am hoping you read this as a critique. The fourth estate is supposed to help the public understand facts and report on the way we are governed. Is there due process in the way Justice is being rendered? Is the Govt. living up to its promises? The way you have gone on about the recent Bombay blasts and the Pakistan connection is awful. Do we have credible information? To name just one critical area for restraint. The emotional energy that has been awakened through this provocation is immense. Obviously it has brought up a lot of pent up resentment of the way we are governed as a whole and the games politicians play. However, is it possible that you focus on creating a positive focus for the energy and not become part of the problem i.e., hysteria, polarisation, self flagellation and promoting jingoism?

Barkha Dutt’s “we the people” on the 30th of November was really revealing of Indian’s situation today and a case in point. What exquisite irony!

1. She and the audience point out that Vilasrao Deshmukh was seen with Ram Gopal Verma etc. who is on the screen? Simi Garewal and a film producer, a V J and a socialite Ness Wadia who probably has never traveled in anything other than a Mercedez Benz!

2. Barkha tries to play the audience and the celebrities to raise the emotional pitch. Simi says, “Don’t pay taxes” and then says she sees Pakistani flags in Mumbai slums; a sensible member of the audience points to Simi and says, “you are the enemy, you are trying to make us a police state”. Absolutely right I think – the guy spoke the truth. Barkha Dutt tries to keep the scene cool; she keeps gesturing with her hands as though she is asking her pet dog to stop yapping. Isn’t this exactly what the politicians do? They tried to play on people emotions, set up celebrities to advertise and occasionally the dogs they set out like Bindranwalla don’t lie down and sleep on instruction. The politicians do this for votes. Barkha does it for TRP. Wow how honourable!

3. Barkha builds up the emotional pitch and has a poem read out and a tearjerker set of pictures. That’s been her formulae all through. The politicians usually play a patriotic song around this time. Ram Gopal Verma has his formulae. This situation is not Kargil. It is not the time for rousing people.

4. The whole time the group keeps bashing everything Indian. Our tolerance and ability to take things with a sense of calmness is bashed up. Politicians are bashed up! Systems are bashed up! And except the distinguished policeman on the scene no one has run anything of the complexity of a city or a state or a nation! India is more complex and less economically powerful than the US. Please stop making comparisons that generate self condemnation.

5. The setting looks like a cathedral and the context is Hindu Muslim antagonism! And anyone who knows anything of history knows how the Christian nations have played with the Middle East and the Muslim nations for decades. The US (whose President talks to God!) has funded the Taliban and Osama bin Laden among others like Sadam and Pinochet for years! Dick Cheney instigated Georgia and then lied through his teeth to condemn Russia. He is a neocon who rides on Christian fundamentalist support! There would be no Mumbai blast or the recent carnage without the crusading George W!! And Simi (is there some irony in SIMI that is playing out here?) talks about how great the US of bloody A is!!

6. Why was the Taj the icon of Mumbai? I thought V T station was more iconic of Mumbai (oops sorry CST)? A friend raised this question in a blog. Was it because the "Aam Admi" died in CST and the rich and famous and the friends of Simi & Wadia are more news worthy?

7. A congress spokes man is called on the scene. He is not allowed to complete his statement. He is asked to hold a brief for the actions of people he has no control over and the audience is encouraged to boo! The famous "lie down" gesture of Barkha did not operate at this time. Is the idea to blacken all politicians and make people disrespect them? Is terrorism not a form of politics? And isn't rabble rousing part of it too?

You must ask yourselves some basic questions : Whose side are you on? What games are you playing (hopefully unconscious)? And in what way are you better than the politician? You love the crisis situations as much as any of them. You are competing for attention with CNN IBN, Times Now etc. etc. TRP goes up and you have the sense of control over the way India thinks and reacts! And you have no responsibility for the consequences - the politicians will have to answer for the TV rabble rousing and its unintended efforts! What a great place to be in!!

I don’t think letters to the editor of much use. But I am outraged by how the media loves a spectacle and how they create hysteria. Can you do better?

Raghu Ananthanarayanan

Satyagrah

2008-12-06T19:22:00.000+05:30

The uprising which has been triggered by some sections of the media has been equated with a new kind of Satyagrah, by some people. Till now this uprising is confined to the very small section of English speaking urban middle classes and in all likely-hood will fizzle out in a few days. However, if it snowballs to a larger scale, we can expect repressive measures by the state (remember the emergency) and counter uprising from other groups. It is unlikely that bodies like the MNS will keep lying low for two long as their leaders are being taken apart. Their response may not necessarily be of direct confrontation but diversionary through creating another kind of hysteria on communal or provincial lines. One shudders to think of the mayhem and destruction that it can lead to.

Even this price one would be willing to pay provided one was engaged in a real Satyagrah. But are we? It may be worth while to re-visit some fundamental features of a Satyagrah before answering that question.

A Satyagrahi is not a cocky absolutist for whom his/her own opinion and grievance is the only truth. For a Satyagrahi, truth is a complex business and there are always multiple truths conflicting with each other. Thus a true Satyagrahi agonizes a great deal over these conflicting truths, as the great Mahatma did, before taking a position.

The position taken is clear, specific and unambiguous including a clear statement of what is expected of the other. It is not a vague protest that I am sick and tired and some thing should be done about the situation. The Satyagrahi takes full responsibility for both the problem and the solution.

Once a position is taken, the Satyagrahi is open to dialogue but is more or less non-negotiable. Open to dialogue because for him/her truth is always “work in progress” and not finality. Non-negotiable because the Satyagrahi only seeks that this is fair and just. As Gandhiji said “In Satyagrah the minimum is also the maximum” It is

not a pressure tactic where you seek to extract as much as you can; and then settle for what ever you can get.

A Sayagrahi is never afraid to trust his/her opponents and always treats them with respect. He/she continues to operate on the premise that the opponent is acting in good faith. This does not mean a naïve acceptance of whatever the opponent does. If the trust is belied the Satyagrahi resumes all over again. This process is best exemplified in Gandhiji’s relationship with General Smuts in South Africa.

The Satyagrahi’s first confrontation is with him/her. We all know from “My experiments with truth” how ruthless and candid this confrontation can be. We also know from Erik Eriksson’s book that even the great Mahatma was not free of infantile entrenchments.

The Satyagrahi is always in resonance with the collective conscience which in a sense enables him/her to go against the popular sentiment when required. We all know that on several occasions there was huge dissonance between Gandhiji’s stances and that of his colleagues as also general public. However his credibility always remained in tact.

If we examine the conduct of this new breed of Satyagrahis in relation to these principles, the picture is not very encouraging. They have been rather dismissive of any view point other than their own. So far at least, no one has specified any clear expectations except a general cry that people in power particularly politicians must act responsibly and must be held accountable. This of course means that every channel can interpret this “responsibility” in its own way. The differences with respect to relationship with Pakistan are clearly visible; and so are the subtle differences in respect of which brand of politicians are to be targeted more. Criticism directed at the media has been steadily ignored. While every one is shouting from the roof top that the politicians are not in touch with people’s anger (which is true) no one is willing to acknowledge that some anger is building towards the media as well. Since the traditional media is controlled by the very people against whom the anger is directed; the only place where it can find expression is the non-conventional forums such as Blogs, Websites etc.

Thus it is difficult to see the present uprising as a form of Satyagrah. At best it is a pressure tactic and at worst, a form of Duragrah (obstinacy coupled with nuisance value) And what can we hope to achieve through this pressure tactic. A few heads will roll (some have and others may follow); which would at best be like playing musical chairs. A few structural measures may be taken and a whole lot will be promised; towards what end we do not know. And of course some new power centres may emerge; To what extent they will be more responsible and accountable, we do not know. In the longer term, people in positions of power may recognize that public ire can be a threat to their survival. This benefit has to be balanced against the potential cost of them being governed even more by their perception of popular opinion rather than fairness and justice. Another long term benefit could be the recognition of the potency of public ire and hence greater willingness to participate in collective issues. However even this may be over shadowed by a deeper cynicism that “the more things change, the more they remain the same the same”.

The crux of Satyagrah is Truth, and it is not easy to deal with truths which threaten our survival, identity and well being. Often while looking at these truths we tend to confuse “sickness” with “illness”. Both deal with pathology but with some differences. Normally, “illness” is regarded as a phenomenon whereas in “sickness” there is also an element of moral judgement. Illness does not induce the kind of disgust and anger which sickness does. We tend to look at an ill person as a victim; whereas in sickness we assume that the pathology is or at least should be within the sphere of volition of the sick person and therefore he/she can be rightfully blamed and regarded as a morally inferior and socially irresponsible person.

Consequently illness is easier to acknowledge, own up and cure. On the other hand sickness induces shame and guilt and hence is repressed, suppressed or projected on to others. This process makes it very difficult to cure it. Even when the sick person/collective acknowledges the pathology, it is more likely to lead to more guilt and self beating (as we presently seem to be engaged in) than a self examination.

Even the most enlightened of us can fall into the trap of not differentiating between that which is within the sphere of our volition and that which is not. Thus we may end up extending sympathy where we need to demand accountability and start blaming where we need to extend understanding and compassion. A striking example of this confusion is the recent “oath campaign” undertaken by Mr. Deepak Chopra. Apparently some time back
Mr. Chopra took an oath that he will be totally non-violent in all his “feelings, thoughts and actions” He then shared this oath in a public forum and invited his audience to join him. Another 450 people did so .Now Mr. Chopra is issuing appeals through TV appearances etc., asking people to take such an oath and influence at least two more people to do so. Through this he hopes to create a mass movement in support of non-violence. Noble as the idea is, it is based on the assumption that our feelings and thoughts are within the sphere of our volition. Even if Mr. Chopra himself has reached this exalted state, does he believe that people to whom he is issuing this appeal are capable of doing so? Personally, I would not even wish to have such complete control over my inner processes but that is another matter. Imagine the plight of a person who in all sincerity takes such an oath and then finds himself plagued by violent thoughts and feelings. Keep in mind that he is not living in a monastery where some support system may exist to deal with such a crisis. Living in every day world, he is more likely to repress/suppress these thoughts and feelings and thereby do violence to himself OR project them on to others and thereby do violence to them. Thus the end result of the campaign may well be the very opposite of what Mr. Chopra intends.

I think it is because the great Mahatma had such a fine idea of this distinction that he never allowed others to join him in his fasts or take oaths which he thought were not within their sphere of volition. Simultaneously he did not give in to sentimental compassion while goading people into action which he felt was within their reach. Thus most of the time (not always) he did not let guilt and shame get better of him. He could openly talk about his own follies and entrenchments, some times even laugh about them; but continue to traverse the path of truth and thus ensuring that his Satyagrah does not degenerate into Duragrah. And let us not forget that there is a limit to what even he could achieve.

In the present uprising this distinction seems to have got blurred. Thus while there is a “free for all” attack on politicians and administrators with no regard for their compulsions/constraints; issues which could be within are sphere of volition are not even being voiced. There are several Bollywood personalities expressing their views through panels/ blogs etc. So far I have not heard any one talk about the connection between Bollywood and underworld. The big wigs from industry have been generally quiet about use of muscle power particularly sectors such as real estate. Even in the realm of politics there are many such issues like “paying people for rallies”, “using muscle power for enforcing bandhs” and the like. Focusing the movement to such specific issues and then seeing them through to their logical conclusion may yet take the present uprising on the path of Satyagrah. These issues may not be “big ticket” ideas for immediate change but neither was toilet cleaning and spinning the charkha.

Angry Outbursts or Dharamyudh?

2008-12-02T15:47:00.001+05:30

In an earlier note entitled “Terror, Communalism and our Split Psyche”, I had written about the two types of infantile responses that we seem to have in dealing with these issues. On 30th of November, 2008, these were acted out in the NDTV’ Program – “We the people” anchored by Ms. Barkha Dutt. Towards the end of the program, one of the panelists Ms. Simi Garewal mentioned that in parts of Mumbai the flags that you find are not of India, Congress, BJP, Shiv- Sena but of Pakistan. The response was explosive. One of the participants shouted at her saying “Muslims are not the enemy, Pakistan is not the enemy; it is you who is the enemy” He was gracious enough to apologize immediately and hence we can presume that his personal disposition was not the issue. Perhaps something more basic and primitive was at play and the parties involved in it did not have a clue themselves as to what had possessed them.

I do not know about the factual accuracy of Ms. Garewal’s contention, but few would deny that there is some linkage between terrorism and communal feelings. Then why the explosion? In order to deal with this question we will need to put the episode under the microscope.

My hunch is that resentment towards Ms. Garewal’s had been building for some time and her comment about the Pakistani flags was the proverbial last straw on the camel’s back. In fact right from the very beginning the panel and the participants had got polarized into two groups on lines of the two types of infantile responses that I had written about. The first group, of which Ms. Garewal was a prominent member, was seething with anger and hatred and wanted strong retaliatory action akin to that of President Bush after 9/11. The second group on the other hand, was caught in its infantile naiveté refusing to accept that the problem is more basic than that of general apathy, lack of robust systems and inappropriate deployment of resources. It wanted to deal with the problem at the neat managerial level, sweeping all emotive issues with slogans of togetherness, Indian-ness and the like.

The raw emotion underlying the exchanges between the two groups was quite palpable through out, yet the entire group with the collusion of the anchor kept side stepping it till it hit them in the face. Pushed to the brink, Ms. Garewal decides to take the bull by its horns and brought the uncomfortable issue of communal divide straight to the table. In face of this assault the second group had no choice other than saying “pass” which most of them did, OR exploding which some of them did. By the time the explosion happened it was too late to do anything except damage control of which the group did a reasonably effective job.

Doesn’t this process sound similar to what we are encountering at the macro level? We keep letting an issue or a problem fester, eventually it explodes in our face; we do a reasonably effective job of damage control and then make heroes out of people who help us with the damage control; and carry on as such till another explosion hits us. In the interim period the same heroes are either forgotten or made into villains. I suspect that what we call our resilience is our great ability for damage control. This is not surprising because a large part of our people have seen so much adversity that they could not have survived without this ability.

It may also be worthwhile to look at the role of the anchor in this process. It appears that she herself was caught right in the centre of the split in the group. Perhaps emotionally she was with the first group and intellectually with the second; but I am guessing here. Even if it is not so, she certainly did not seem to have addressed the split within herself. Hence she was ill equipped to facilitate a dialogue between the two groups. All that she could do was to wade her way through the naked dance of human emotion which was taking place around her and then hope to deliver a message. Some evidence for this hypothesis comes from the amount of air time which she took and some from her closure. Her closure was through a very poignant and powerful poem which had a clear message in it- let us use our pain and anger for transformation. One wonders why she not opened the program with this poem rather than closing with it. Had she opened the program with the poem, it is possible that the evocative poignancy would have mellowed the hardliners of the first group. Similarly the cold and brutal reality of the poem could have jolted the rational idealists of the second group and brought them to ground realities. Perhaps she thought that delivering the message is enough and no further work needs to be done with it except of translating into a concrete action plan. And this is where I have a problem. It is based on an over simplistic assumption that only if we have sufficient sincerity and determination; we can lick our problems. Sincerity and determination are necessary but not sufficient. By themselves they can not transform angry children into “dharmik warriors”. “Dharmik Warriors” also need a perspective and considerably higher degree of emotional maturity than what is evidenced today.

Today we are all seething with hurt, anger and rage. There is a broad consensus that this anger contains the potential for transformation. However if we release this anger in its present form it will lead to a chain of reactivity causing considerable mayhem and self destruction. Our first task should be to convert this anger into the energy of a “dharmik warrior”. A “dharmik warrior” needs both the raw passion of a child and the discernment and self regulation of an adult. We have a difficulty here. When our raw passion is awakened the discernment and self regulation go for a six; and when the discerning adult takes charge, the raw passion is either suppressed or repressed. Part of the problem lies in our concept of maturity which is so heavily tilted towards rationality, objectivity and civilized behaviour that there is no space for our primitive side. Hence when the primitive self awakens we just do not know what to do with it other than either suppressing it or surrendering to it altogether.

The “dharmik warrior” also needs faith and willingness to surrender to a higher order. Unfortunately our experience with our leaders in almost all spheres has carried so many let downs that today we are only left with cynicism making it extremely difficult for us to have faith and to surrender.

These are only some of the difficulties. There are many more. The main thing is that the current chain of events has presented to us a real opportunity for transformation. If we suppress or repress our anger it will further corrode us; on the other hand, if we release it in its present form it will destroy us. Our only real choice is to convert it into the energy of a “dharmik warrior” but it is not an easy task. Whether we like it or not the first step in any dharamyudh is against one’s own self through a ruthless confrontation with one’s own infantile entrenchments. In absence of such self examination, In the name of dharamyudh we will merely create another set of terrorists who will believe that their beliefs and opinions are the absolute truth and all differences must be eliminated

A Dog's Death!

2008-12-02T15:06:00.001+05:30

I am reminded of a Punjabi play I saw many years ago…… called “Longowal da kutta”. It’s a story of a dog on the India Pakistan border at Longowal, Punjab. The dog, being an animal, found its innocent freedom in crossing the border and making friends with the Pakistani soldiers at the army outpost because they would feed him meat. He would come across to the Indian army outpost and they would feed him milk. Being a dog, he would go to both camps not knowing that they were on different sides of a country border and different religions, and enemies. Both the camp soldiers came to love the dog dearly and made him a part of the camp fellowship, not knowing that the dog belonged to both places. One day, the Indian commander found the dog walking on the hillock that separated the two countries and going over to the ‘enemy’ camp. The dog was labelled a traitor immediately. On the same trip, the Pakistani Commander of the camp also discovered that the dog was two-timing him. It so happened that simultaneously they opened fire on the dog that they loved so much and who had become so dear to them and ….. of course, the dog died in the encounter. The Pakistani commander says…… “bechara kutta, shaheed ho gaya” and the Indian commander says…..”bewakoof bewafaa….. kutte di maut maraya”

Who is right or wrong in all this……is it Islam that glorifies death by violent means as “shahadat”? Is it the dog that was only being true to his hunger instinct? Is it Indians who glorify patriotism and denounce any act that is not patriotic? Or is it human nature to indulge in violent acts and then rationalise it in the name of religion or patriotism?

One of the core anchors of identity formation is identification with ideology and religion…….we are birds of one feather. In belonging to some religion, region, caste, gender (etc.) we necessarily exclude those that do not belong to the same “group”. And the stage is set for “us and them” games which escalate into conflicts that take human nature to violent extremes.

Darwin says that the strongest instinct of the animal kingdom is Self Preservation. Any observer of human nature knows that beyond Self Preservation is another instinct that is still stronger…. And that is Self Image Preservation. So in the process of defining our identity as belonging, and engaging with preserving these labels we have given ourselves, we find it rational enough to perpetrate violence on the ‘other’. We will drive ourselves to fidayeen suicide in order to preserve our Self Image and defy all Darwinian notions.

There is an inherent self destructiveness in all this.

Man’s search for meaning of “Who am I?” leads him to define himself with labels of region, religion, race, caste, gender (etc). The universe, however, is unlimited. And each human being a microcosm of the universe is also limitless. Defining also means ignoring the “moreness” that is possible. But the definition of the Self and the quest for “Who am I?” prevents him from touching this universe within.

Lekin……sab maya hai!

“Enough is enough” – means what?

2008-12-02T13:51:00.000+05:30

“Enough is enough” is an expression which seems to have caught the fancy of many people. Hence it may be worth while to explore its meaning and implications.

At the simplest level it is an expression of anguish and a statement of one’s limit of tolerance. In other words the person is saying “I can not take it any more”. At this level, it can only be registered, accepted and sympathized with.

At the next level, it is a threat or an ultimatum. Though not clearly stated, presumably the ultimatum is being issued to the people in power particularly the politicians- if you do not exercise your power in a responsible and accountable manner, we will be forced to retaliate. The obvious question is –what is the nature of retaliation being contemplated? Clearly it can not be replacing present politicians with another existing set. The other possible choice is violence- a la “Rang de Basanti” style. Since we are talking here of freedom from terror, we can not possibly be thinking of replacing one form of terror with another. That leaves us with the choice of direct political action through formation of a new political force comprising primarily of people who we regard as sane, honest, well meaning, competent, rational, articulate, cultured, and whose allegiance is primarily to India and not to any particular community, province or religion. A large part of this constituency will perhaps come from the educated, urban middle class population. This is somewhat similar to the Leadership hunt exercise undertaken by Times of India with much fan fare, but what good has or will come out of it, we do not know.

Though the idea of this new political constituency seems sexy, its feasibility and desirability is somewhat dubious. Firstly most people of this kind are “isolates”, not very community centric and not very strongly connected with the grass roots. Many of the people from this category who have entered the political space (our present PM being one such) often find themselves overpowered by the compulsions of the grass root leader whose links with his/her constituency are more emotive than rational and have a much greater component of caste, religion, province and community . Finally, most of our other institutions like bureaucracy, judiciary, education, business corporations, health care, media etc. are in any case being governed by this category. Though we may not like to admit it but their record of exercising power in a responsible manner has not been particularly impressive. It is often argued that it is the self seeking and corrupt politician who is the source of problems in these institutions. However it is worth asking the question that had power been exercised in a responsible manner in these institutions, would the politician have been able to get away the way he has? Even if we accept that the politician is the main villain, where is the guarantee that this new category will throw up leaders who are less self seeking and corrupt?

Finally, “Enough is enough” is a statement of resolve to break free from earlier patterns and entrenchments, and the willingness to retrace one’s steps and begin all over again. It is akin to an alcoholic kicking the bottle or a gambler leaving the table after heavy losses rather than continue to chase “bad” money with “good”. It entails recognizing one’s past beliefs, follies, infantile expectations and saying good bye to them.

In this sense, “Enough is enough” is most feasible and meaningful but neither very easy nor very sexy. After all, it is a lot more dramatic and tempting to continue to throw the dice in the hope that luck will change and one will be able to recoup all one’s losses. It is not easy to admit to one’s follies and infantile entrenchments particularly when there are no quick fix solutions. Departure from past can not guarantee success; it can at best ensure that the mistakes of the past are not repeated. In this sense, it is a slow hard grind and does not fulfill our infantile craving for the “magic wand” which will lick the problem for once and for all.

The resolve has both a personal and a collective dimension. Clearly we have greater control over the personal dimension and hence it may be easier to begin there. For myself, I have made the following resolves for myself

I will be extra vigilant in exercise of personal and positional power both for myself and others. The lack of responsibility does not merely lie in acts of commission but equally in acts of omission. While I may not be able to do much in respect of others but I can at least point it out and bring it to their attention. Often I have not even done this out of my infantile fear of being “ticked off” and told to mind my own business. Needless to say, we can not hope to create a culture of accountability if we all continue to operate on the principle of “Meri Marzi” (I will do as I please, spit where I want to, urinate where I can, jump queue wherever I can, drive as I wish, etc, etc, so long as I avoid punitive action)

I will express my self on public forums such as the present one irrespective of whether I get a response or not. In the past I have refrained from doing so because I said to myself “I am not a celebrity and I have nothing original or earth shaking to say, so why would any one bother to even read let alone engage with what I have to say”. I now recognize that beneath this was my infantile wish that all my offerings should be treated as special.

Through these personal examples, I am also trying to highlight the fact all departures necessarily entail confrontation with infantile beliefs, fears and wishes. By themselves they are neither unhealthy nor undesirable. However when we mortgage our freedom of choice to them, we only create entrenchments for ourselves. These infantile entrenchments exist not just at the personal but also at the collective level. Perhaps our propensity to blame the politician for all that is wrong has something to do with our entrenchment in the infantile fantasy of the omnipotent parent. Wasn’t he/she responsible for our safety, security and well being? Who else but him/her can we blame when things go wrong?

My intention here is not to defend the politician. That our political system has become near pathological is a reality that has been stated so many times that it does not need any repetition. The question that we need to ask is that “Is the malice of irresponsible exercise of personal and positional power only confined to the politician?; and if it is more wide spread then which institution provides us the greatest leverage for tackling it?” The popular answer to the second part of this question has been that the change must begin with the politician because after all he/she is the ultimate source. Even if we accept the diagnosis that the politician is indeed the root cause, it still does not imply that the treatment must begin there. As any good doctor will tell us that before dealing with the root cause you need to prepare the organism in several ways for the treatment to be effective.

My own view is that the institution which is relatively best placed to provide us with the leverage for transformation that we are seeking, is Media - not just the English medium urban media but more importantly the media which reaches the grass roots of this country. Admittedly, the Media itself is a captive of the malice, but it is still our best bet. In a democracy (and I presume that we wish to remain one) the main platform from where accountability can be demanded from other institutions is Media. Given the fact, that the Media has considerable “punitive” power (particularly through “shaming”) as also “Rescue” power in preventing victimization and scapegoating, it at least has some ammunition which can be deployed on behalf of our collective conscience. However this can only happen if first the Media becomes the holder of the collective conscience. Only then it can hope to occupy the ethical ground from which accountability from others can be demanded. Unfortunately, at present our Media is no where near such a ground. If it wishes to move in this direction, then the following suggestions may be worth looking at
Refrain from using expressions such as “exclusive” “first to report” and the like. Ask your self –does it really matter and is it worth the pressure that you put onto yourself and the compromises that it forces you to make?
Refrain from villainising or making heroes out of people at the first instance. As it is there is so much cynicism that we are leaving with, the propensity to villainies further erodes exercising of legitimate authority and also respect for it. Similarly our infantile need for a messiah to come and save us gets evoked and the poor human being who are being hailed as a hero, has to deal with the resultant projections.
Learn to leave people alone particularly in their moments of tragedy/trauma. At present you are merely pandering to the sadistic/masochistic side of your viewers and simultaneously letting them discharge their guilt through showing disgust at your crass behaviour.
Stop conducting meaningless opinion polls. Firstly, they reduce the business of voting to a cheap game; but more importantly they reinforce the culture of “uninformed entrenchments”. Let me explain, we live in a world where there is too much “spread” and very little “depth” On most issues we have very little real understanding and yet we believe that our “beliefs and opinions” must count. Opinion polls pander to this feeling and inadvertently reinforce the entrenchment in ill-informed beliefs and opinions. This can be extremely dangerous particularly when it comes to issues which have a high emotive content.
Ensure that your issue based programs with public participation (e.g. “We the people”) are spaces for genuine dialogue. Be selective in your choice of panelists and participants. Having celebrities may help with your TRP but may adversely affect the substantiveness of the discussion. At present, in most of these programs there is such a scramble for “air time” that they are inevitably reduced to an exercise in one up man ship and provocations which can be quite destructive.
Create forums wherein your own beliefs, values, political leanings etc. can be explored. Journalists are supposed to be neutral which is absurd. Only robots can be neutral. Honour your own value frames and political ideology but simultaneously create opportunities for you to understand their impact on your coverage.
Finally and this perhaps is the crux of every thing else - treat your audience/viewers with respect. At present you first pander to their infantile side and then preach homilies to them in a patronizing way. Note that this strategy of “pander and Preach” is precisely what the politician does in dealing with his/her market segment; and we all know the havoc which it has created.

It is highly likely that most of these suggestions would be regarded as “impractical” in today’s world of competitive journalism. But are they any more impractical than expecting the politician not to use communal/sectoral feelings for electoral gains. Perhaps we are all in the same boat - captives of the self-fulfilling prophecy that the world we live in is so chaotic that “self regulation” will mean “losing out”. Just like Vijay (character played by Amitabh Bachhan) in Deewar, we all seem to be saying “why should I lose out. Let others sign first and then I assure you that I will”. Unfortunately, we have no assurance or guarantee of what others will do. We can only decide for ourselves whether to sign on the dotted line or not.

Terror, Communalism and our split psyche

2008-11-29T11:56:00.000+05:30

A close friend – an extremely intelligent, sensitive, articulate and socially conscious young woman was sharing with me her sadness and anger on behalf of the average Muslim who finds himself a target of direct or indirect suspicion for no fault of her/his. Her sharing had been triggered after an encounter with a Muslim colleague whom she experienced as extremely virulent in his attack on Pakistan, Indian Mujaheedin, SIMI and the like. While she could sense the sincerity of his feelings, she was also left wondering whether in some ways her colleague was unconsciously trying to prove his loyalty to this country. Understandably, she was quite upset by the fact that some of our countrymen have been pushed into such a position where they need to prove their loyalty. Needless to say, thereafter she went on with an equally virulent attack on forces (such as Narendra Modi, Bajrang Dal, VHP and the like) who have created this mistrust towards the Muslim community.

While I could sense the sincerity of her feelings, I was also left wondering whether just like her Muslim colleague, she was unconsciously desperately trying to distance herself from these forces. The question that it left me with is where does this need (on either part) to distance ourselves from certain part of our community arise? Perhaps it has something to do with the way in which we deal with our communal/parochial identities. It seems to me that invariably our response, particularly in moments of crisis, falls into one of the two kinds of infantile responses – either of unrestrained discharge or naiveté.

The infantile nature of the unrestrained discharge is much too common and much too obvious. It makes us give vent to our mistrust, hatred and violence with no regard either to human values or resultant destructive consequences. We all are familiar with it and it needs no further elaboration.

However, the infantile nature of the naiveté is a lot more subtle. Since it is accompanied by “political correctness” and idealism of “universal brotherhood”; it is a lot more difficult to recognize. It is often expressed through statements like “terrorists have no religion”, “most of us have no communal prejudices”, “all the trouble is created by vested interest, particularly politicians and religious leaders”, etc, etc. Needless to say, besides being over simplistic, none of these can even withstand the scrutiny of truth. This naiveté is seen by many people as a sign of maturity. The hallmark of maturity is acceptance of truth no matter how painful and not escape into this kind of romantic idealism.

Beneath these infantile responses, lies the split between that part of us which is civilized and that part of ourselves which is primitive. In situations like this, the civilized self propels us to be rational, watchful of our stereotypes, be non punitive, be tolerant, etc, etc.

On the other hand, the primitive part of ourselves seethes with rage and anger, is concerned with self protection, is suspicious and paranoid and wants to give expression to our own helplessness and impotent rage. Somehow, we have come to believe that the civilized self is the right way to be and is the hallmark of our maturity; whereas the primitive part of ourselves is undesirable, immature and must be repressed/suppressed. It is therefore not surprising that we pretend both to ourselves and also to others that the civilized part of ourselves is our total self. The primitive self is invariably projected onto others, including those who we call the fundamentalists, terrorists, self seeking politicians, etc, etc.

It is not difficult to see that both the infantile responses mentioned earlier stem from the same source namely, the hatred of the other. In the first case, the “other” is defined as one who belongs to another community, religion, cast, etc, whereas in the second, the “other” is one who has a different ideology, world view and value frame. Many of “civilized people” even have difficulty in accepting that the “fundamentalist and terrorist” is also governed (in fact is highly governed) by a certain ideology and value frame.

Our difficulty in accepting that the primitive part of ourselves is also governed by certain values and orientations which are equally necessary as the values and orientations of the civilized self; can be illustrated through Mr. Amitabh Bachhan’s sharing in his blog where he has talked about his feeling ashamed at having slept with a revolver under his pillow. Though Mr. Bachhan has not elaborated on the nature of his shame, it can be surmised that his shame stems from feeling insecure and acting from his need for self defense. While in his case, the issue may be a little more complex given his iconic status, many of us perhaps also experience this shame when it comes to acknowledging our primitive nature. In over valuing the civilsed self, we seem to have ignored that our primitive self also is a source of our heroism, passion, valour, sense of belonging and loyalty, etc, etc. Consequently, along with our negative projections, even these positive values get transferred to the underbelly of the collective, represented by gangsters, extremists and the like.

The integration of the civilsed self and the primitive self has an individual dimension as also a collective dimension. The issue of parochial and/or communal feelings has a lot to do with both, particularly the latter.

To begin with we need to recognize that communal feelings exist; they are neither good nor bad, they just are. They are a product of centuries of experience and can not just be wished away. The communal feelings are not necessarily of mutual hatred and mistrust; they also carry with them mutual understanding, co-existence, respect, empathy and the like. Sadly, in running away from the negatives of the communal feelings, even the positives get forgotten. It is only if we recognize and accept the simultaneity of both the positives and the negatives of these communal feelings that we have any hope of dealing with them in a responsible manner. The primitive attempt to eliminate or punish the “other” who we mistrust is of course not going to take us anywhere. Similarly, attempts to wish away the communal feelings in the garb of romantic idealism are also doomed to fail.

The only plausible path that we have is
(a) Stop feeling ashamed about our primitive self where many of the communal feelings and prejudices reside.
(b) Develop ways and means whereby the destructive potential of the negative components of the communal feelings can be contained; for instance our forefathers learnt to do it through strict norms of engagement across communities (e.g. prohibiting marriage across communities). Needless to say, in today’s time those boundaries are neither feasible nor desirable. What we need to think about is ways and means which can be evolved wherein there can be higher degree of sensitivity to the idiosyncrasies and seemingly irrational side of the “other” – for instance if Hindus keep showing their distaste at beef eating habit of Muslims, and Muslims keep mocking at idol worship of the Hindus, and many other such ways of life of each other, we are going anywhere.
(c) Recognise the collective perception that we have of each other without making it into a stereotype to be applied without discrimination. Thus we may hold an unconscious perception that Muslims are more aggressive and Hindus are more timid. If we do not consciously acknowledge the existence of such collective perceptions, we will only push them into the unconscious, will continue to be governed by them and simultaneously keep denying their existence at the conscious level.
(d) To reclaim the responsibility and accountability for community building from the extremist fringes to which we have handed it over. Preoccupied with our civilsed rational selves, both communities seem to have abdicated the task of engaging with the primitive side to the marginal fringes of the community. Thus invariably, it is the alienated marginalized who take charge of community issues, both positive - community celebrations and negative – angst and grievances.
(e) Own up our common heritage for both its positives and negatives, rather than bracket them into heroic and villainous depending upon our selective interpretation. This can help us in building a real national pride rather than just making a slogan out of it.

Mumbai terror attacks

2008-11-29T07:18:00.005+05:30

I am outraged, angry and sad at what's happened and is still unfolding. I think we in Sumedhas ought to have responses to what is happening, not just to this incident alone.

We as a community of professionals in the behavioural science area; as people who are committed to explore, help, shape, experiment with various facets of human context, need to have our responses. I have mine and I am writing - spoken to some others and some are willing to voice theirs.

Can we have others voicing theirs? this is a trying time for the country - trauma is severe and the wound is deep. Economic slowdown and terror together threaten to plunge our collective psyche in to deep regression of all kinds.

we need to be out there. For we deal with the people in the corporate sector, the NGO sector, with student bodies, with people who are largely urban and are feeling the trauma of these terror attacks the most, directly and indirectly. The post traumatic stress syndrome is already catching up with us. We have started living in fear and paranoia and our impotent rage makes us feel all the more helpless.

How do we, as Sumedhavians, respond and engage with this in the collective - in our families, friends circle, work spaces, consulting spaces, community spaces and in the larger space like media, etc?

How? i dont have any definite answer yet but i believe we ought to, in our own way,voicing, joining, healing, shaping, exploring, creating ... whichever way.

What about you?

Fear of Success

2008-11-11T19:37:00.000+05:30

Why are we afraid of success? Very often the pinnacle of our achievements is there for us to see, we sight it, and then we roll ourselves down the hill, afraid, so afraid. We do not wish to reach the top, to spread our arms wide and embrace whatever meets us there. We do not want to finally hoist the flag on top of the mountain and proclaim our victory.

Instead of shouting from the top and hollering to the world that yes, I did what I did, and now look at me— we become the pipsqueak mouse that runs downhill to hide in his little hole. No matter that you worked very hard, no matter that you are now being rewarded for talents recognized, you will be blinded by the fear that perhaps this is not what you deserve, perhaps this is not what you want, perhaps this is something you have not earned. Your doubts and fears will unravel your mind and all the strength will drain from your body.

Why do we fail to make that last lap happen or run that extra mile to get the trophy, when all the while it is that very dream we have worked towards?

We need to make it to the top. We need to open our arms wide and embrace the sunlight surrounding us at the pinnacle. We need to see ourselves through to the end. We must not shy away from the ultimate realization. A self defeating attitude has to be ground to dust. We have to emerge victorious and claim what is indeed ours.

***

Difference between Excellence and Perfection

2008-10-22T09:42:00.004+05:30

Excellence involves enjoying what we do.
Perfection means not being satisfied-no matter what.eg feeling bad about a 98% and always trying to find mistakes for the 2% and not feeling good about on the things we are doing well.
in the grand scheme of things it turns people into slaves of success,but keeps them focused on failure, dooming them to a lifetime of doubt and depression.

Citizen of the Planet

2008-10-15T21:39:00.001+05:30

Irrespective of their size, as organisations (profit and non-profit) increase their footprint, grappling with Globalisation is a real issue. Interestingly the oxford dictionary defines "Global" as "relating to the whole world; worldwide". So if i am a human who lives in a particular country, how am i related to the whole world' and in my actions, how am in taking care of this relateness to the whole, rather than a few parts of the world.

In the absence of this stream of thought, we allow ourselves to be divided by cast, colour, religion, nationality and innumerable other divides that we(humans) have perfected, during the orbit of the sun around the galaxy.

As an example, How do Indian, German and French members of a team work together across their National, Religious, Social and Economic identities? Who prevails over whom, and based on what; gets played out in various ways. Many organisations are unable to grow, just because they are unable to address this basic problem.
Working in a Global context, that relates itself to the whole world, to me seems to be a way forward, out of the dilemmas that this increasing footprint of organisations is creating. Some important considerations are:

How do we build mutual trust and mutual respect? How do i grace my idenity and honour other idenities too?
What would be the attributes of a "Citizen of the Planet", as opposed to "Citizen of a particular country"?

Helping humans become "Citizens of the Planet" is an area that needs much dialogue. This i believe is the key to many problems that are real to all of us today. What these attributes should be and how can we collectively make this possible is an unanswered question for me, as of now.

collation of responses and dialogues from fellows and interns on sharing the review process

2008-10-08T13:54:00.001+05:30

Hi Sharbori,
The collective reflection has been apt.. I can relate with quite a bit of it.
While reading parts of it I felt very related and part of Sumedhas and yet again there was a feeling that if I feel related I will have to conform to the group norms and in that process my self discovery may not happen!!
Dont know both are contradictory feelings!! Am responding to your mail in an impulse.. casue If I think thru it.. i won't send such a mail.. but yes.. I wold like to express my feelings as is (could be my fluctuating hormones too :-)
Take care, and yes I will re read the collective reflections and respond .
Regards

Saru
(Phase I- 2008)
==================================================================================

Hey Sharbari,

I admire the effort you guys put in so diligently...so regularly...to facilitate a dialogue between each other (including the interns).It makes me feel the value you attribute to the process is unconditional, perhaps non negotiable in a beautiful way.

The participation in my 2 phases has shaken a lot of dead layers for me personally, I do not know where this leads, but I DO know that the journey has been enriched in many a splendour colors and dimensions...My old patterns still flow in unexpectedly and catch me unaware many a times...but soon enough I can sit back and see them happening outside me, and this witness, an amused being, just accepting the slow yet firm dissipation and transformation by simply acknowledging it...neither fighting it our flighting from it...

I love the whole process.

Thanks to all of you once again.

Poonam(Phase II - 2008)
==================================================================

Hi,

I went thru the note ,the foll are my reflections;

felt nice that a group such as the one which has taken up this review work has actually gone thru my work,in some of the comments you have noted down as to the nature of overall reflections of phase 1 students I could see my own review being thrown up. I was also in a way able to touch the pervasive feelings of others in my phase 1 group.

AWAITING my personal feedback ...

Warm Regards
Barat Vinayakan(Phase I – 2008)
=================================================================
Dear Sharbori,

Thanks for this detail documentation of the process as it unfolded in your meeting. I feel this helps us link all three phases and actually see Sumedhas as a community to which our belonging goes beyond just individual engagement and take aways in self exploration.

I feel part of the process of Sumedhas, the institution existing beyond the process space during internships or labs also now. It helps me develop a relationship with the collective and not just with individuals in the Sumedhas collective.

Regards,
Meenakshi (Phase II - 2008)
===================================================================
Thanks for the invitation for joint exploration. Will take it up in time. The blog space for the community sounds very good.

Cheers!
Dhanu

Dhanu (phase II – 2008))
=================================================================
Sarbari - I am in the process of penning down my response. This is a slow week at work so hopefully I can send it .

I will try posting my comments on the blog directly..if that doesn't work you are welcome to add it there.

I had great hopes to plan a local chapter meet - but so far personal constraints are proving difficult to manage. Hopefully the blog is a first step and also makes it easier to organize a meet.

Regards
Sumedha
Phase I (2008)
==================================================================
Hi
Wanted to appreciate you sharing this document. It certainly helped to keep engagement alive with the institution apart from SP. Its a grt move!

1. I think as a first attempt its a pretty articulate note. It captures the participants themes well. It also gives us some peek into what emerged for Phase 1 and 2.
Evokes memories of similar and not-so-similar experiences for me in the past in SP.

2. Where the note could have worked harder is the process reflection of what you guys did in the 1.5 days. Little more texture could help to understand your processes that might have impacted the interpretation and tonality of the note. Also if institutionally there are implications for action and reflection hidden in how we function as an entity as also format implication for SP. How much of this could be shared or not is at your discretion, of course.

3. Lastly, what might also help me is if there is some specific way in which we could respond (right now am going by my intuition)

Hope this is of some use.

Thanks
Amit Desai
Phase III (2008)
=================================================================
Dear Sarbari,

I have been silent for a while, as i was recovering from a viral fever. Am ok now.

The collective reflection is a good platform that helps understand where are we in group think. The part which dwells upon `“what is being me” or what are the terrorising aspects of the system don’t come through clearly.' is very interesting. It has opened up scope for many possibilities. It is a good initiative.

Regards,

Atul Bhal Deshpande
Phase II – 2008)
===================================================================
Hello Sarbari,
Its nice to see a Sumedhas mail and one from you! I have been recant and been pretty immersed in office life since I shifted to ING Vysya....but Sumedhas always seems to be on my mind.

On the reflections, frankly lot of it went over my head but I get the general drift. Some thoughts:

I think the link between late submissions / not responding to mails etc and how people view the Sumedhas system is a bit tenuous. This is something which comes from peoples' general work ethic...:)

To go on a little different tangent, one thing I was wondering about is that I rarely see any reference to religion/ faith in any of the Sumedhas discussions. Considering we live in a fairly religious society (or system, if you prefer the word), this aspect seems understated. Though I think men and women derive different things out of religion. I personally was involved in only one 2 week program last year so I don't know. I wonder how the faculty hold religion, since all of you are pretty self evolved beings, would you bow down to a God? Could that be why the bias creeps in or is it due to the non-Indian origins of human process work?

I am myself something of an agnostic or a sceptic at the very least. But I often run into this aspect while dealing with other people.

Those are general thoughts...

Actually for some reason i don't seem to be getting any mails from Sumedhas for the last 7 mts since i shifted companies. I did write to Gagan and the Samuday mail ID, i'll do so again.

Regards

Kapil S Bharatan
(Phase I – 2007)
===================================================================
Hello Sharabori
Nice to see your mail after quite some time
It is really a good effort
Will be in touch with Jayavelu too
SR Ravichandran
Fellow
==================================================================
Hi,

I went thru the note ,the foll are my reflections;

felt nice that a group such as the one which has taken up this review work has actually gone thru my work,in some of the comments you have noted down as to the nature of overall reflections of phase 1 students I could see my own review being thrown up. I was also in a way able to touch the pervasive feelings of others in my phase 1 group.

AWAITING my personal feedback ...

Warm Regards
Barat Vinayakan
Phase I – 2008)
===================================================================

Dear Sharbaori
I think your review of the process was comprehensive and explanatory and hence i felt into it. I have no specific thoughts about other than you wrote about it.

I welcome your suggestion to include more pople in the process of review.

I suggest that we need to also look at what are those other things that we miss and only create a space wherein person feels understood or held /healed. Also how the politics within faculty is felt and impacts the internship process.

My understanding of impact of faculty politics on internship is that some of the participants do not like it and also do not articulate it in the space but are likely to take decisions of whether they will like to come back either to be a fellow of Sumedhas or

Also some get invited to continue internship process even when the evidence suggests that the participant has not worked with self in the space.

I will definitely likely to share my thoughts on this process.
arun
Fellow
===================================================================
I think I find the dialogue re definition of learning in Process Work relevant.
learning at adult levels is often described as change in behavior. The intern should be able to fathom patterns of his interface with systems as well as self and consciously seek to achieve samiltaneous well being of the self and system. Inaddition the intern would need to understand the postulates and antecedent (intellectual) of PW to be able to critique it.

Atul Sapre
Fellow
===========================================================================

What a meaningful initiative

2008-10-08T03:46:00.001+05:30

Folks, This blog is just super !! I am hoping that over time, more and more people will join in and enrich this community.

A quick update from me - and a reflection. I have been on this very interesting and fun filled holiday with my family in the US. We spent good time at New York, went to see the magical Niagara Falls, and are currently having a rollicking time at Disneyworld, Orlando. It is here in Disney, that I am understanding the practical meaning of the phrase "roller coaster ride". Most of the times, in personal updates that either I have shared in Sumedhas spaces, or have heard other Fellows / Interns sharing - the term has been used to denote the swings and turbulences of life, and the effect of the shenanigans that life seems to unleash on well-prepared yet unsuspecting others (meaning - us) :-)

But, these roller coasters in Disney are a different something altogether.

I also am in touch with something else. Very often, US bashing comes easy to me. In most conversations that I have participated in that have had some reference to the US, I have tended to be somewhat disparaging of the US, willy nilly. However, having been here on a pure vacation, with NO hint of work whatsoever, I marvel at what these guys have achieved - the way they take care of their national monuments, the way they have given form and life to their imagination, they way they seem to celebrate a certain zest for life, play and fun. I doff my hat to their spirit.

I believe I have become more aware of what it takes to foster pride for one's heritage and one's nation.

Let me end this blog with a huge note of acknowledgement to Naren, Sarbs and Jeyavelu (and anybody else that may have worked to creating this blog) - this blog is a clear step forward. Good show, indeed.

Love
Kaka

Joining the Sumedhas blog as Author

2008-10-07T05:18:00.000+05:30

Dear Sumedhavians,

We have sent invitations to all the Fellows and a few interns (for trial, all interns will be invited shortly) to join the Sumedhas blog. A few people have been unable to accept the invitation and join the blog. Sarbari has found a way to work around it. I am giving below her email with four step process.

Hopefully this should solve the problem. If anybody still has a problem please email me.

I am sending individual invitations to all fellows and interns again today. Do join in and start writing your views in the blog.

Velu

Sarbari's email

Dear All,

Some of you who may have a gmail account, but do not have a personal blog, may run into problems while signing into the invitation. One solution that I have found from Google blogger help and it has worked is the following:

Step 1: go to www.blogger.com

Step 2: sign in with your existing gmail account or create a new gmail account

Step 3: create a blog (just do the first step. You can also do all three steps in case you want to create your own personal blog)

Step 4: come back to the invitation sent by Jeyavelu and click on the link to accept your invitation and it will work.

Do let me know if you are having any problem.

Sharabori

Internship Review Committee Meeting 2008

2008-10-07T04:59:00.000+05:30

Photos from the Internship Review Committee Meeting held in September 2008. You are not seeing Sarbari in the pictures as shes the one taking them. Thanks Sarbari.

Insti Meet 2008: Message from Chairperson Raghu

2008-10-01T14:43:00.000+05:30

Dear Sumedhavins,

I am just back from the Institutional meet and the feeling is overwhelmingly of having passed the baton on to the new team. I am giving below the gist of the statements made by the participants of the meet and it will capture a lot of the flavour of what happened. Siddhartha came in with an interesting mixture of curiosity and commitment and that has helped us give shape to concerns and ideas we have been with for some time.

The concluding statements :

1. We have done some forward thinking. Challenges in context of larger context - Activism and risk

2. I am experiencing Sumedhas not just programme centric. We must have more such dialogue forums

3. The idea of exploring the religious identity is very powerful, let us do some experimental work with the idea first.

4. Sense of play. Space for offering myself more freely

5. Not flooded with a lot of tasks. Excited energized

6. Invited in and willing to stake my space. Organisation and management teachers – I would like to get involved in offerings for this sector.

7. Exhilarating experience – excitement and anxiety – never felt an outsider.

8. We have taken some first steps here to bridge org + social action. Can community building meaning and processes be brought in to Sumedhas also?

9. What world am I creating back home – sustain that work in corporate – expanding my idea of human context. I can engage with S beyond programmes.

10. Not an inst meet which started with - what ails us? But, looking at the world at large – we started by expanding the consciousness of a larger context and therefore our stance and seeing ourselves as an experiment with a “self organizing ecological system”. Meaning of faith – experienced a walk in the woods. I can now take my role with lightness of being without taking it lightly.

11. I am feeling good – S – last leg of adolescence – out of self absorption. Experiencing sincerity – I keep alive skepticism; pattern of emotional infrastructure emerging that is different from before.

The key issues discussed were around the question - what is our reason for being and therefore how will the new team of role holders recalibrate their roles.

1. We revisited the nature of transitions we are encountering in the world; the fact of a looming environmental crisis was dwelt upon. We then also discussed the fact that religious tensions are also placing enormous stress on the interior landscape of man. We speculated on the possibility that given the techno economic centricity of life and the thrust of market fundamentalism, the angst that most people feel is due to an absence of any space where there is an experience of integral personhood. All interfaces have a transactional nature asking for a response from one fragment of the self for a short period of time. Is the yearning for an experience of wholesomeness, belonging, respite from the constant challenge of choice making the nature of the human angst?

2. The nature of the discussion this time around had an interesting centre of gravity, poised between self absorption and objective 'out there' observations. The discourse allowed for both self reflection and observation of phenomenon. The role holders have the added challenge of converting the convergent ideas from the dialogue into action alternatives.

3. Siddhartha brought in a statement that might be some thing for us to discuss further and evolve a kind of a vision to work for "10 years from now, when the world is in very visible crisis, will Sumedhas be a space for dialogue where seeds of a new way are being nurtured".

These three broad platforms of discourse helped us stay with an examination of the human context.

4. We then looked at process work. The locus of our work lies in the tension between a persons socio psychological universe and the techno economic context. Today the nature of both needs to be redefined. The ideological and normative context of family and institutions is shaky; the agrarian value frames are cracking up; consumption, and instrumentality are on the rise. The external context of work is advancing technologically and becoming more complex but also more transitory and transactional. We spent some time looking at the paradox of a person trying to resolve the tension between agency and communion through more and more agency! A search for a communion 'out there' in a world that is fragmented, transitory and transactional. Can Sumedhas therefore be the space where this pain and angst is examined, explored? Where one discovers viable and creative alternatives to live by?

5. This then brought us to the question : How do we define development?

We also had interesting addas where all the Mahabharatha heros were examined in detail. A search for the feminine equivalents of the Pandavas has been initiated. Anyone who finds them will please bring them along for the next adda!

Regards

Raghu

Collective Reflections by the Internship Review Committee on the review process August 2008

2008-10-01T14:32:00.000+05:30

Collective Reflections by the Internship Review Committee on the review process August 2008

Members present: Narendran, Kartikeyan, Gagandeep and Sharabori

The process

The members met from 31st August afternoon to 1st September end of day. The reviews were read in conjunction with respective faculty feedback for the concerned participant which included personal themes (no data), participation process and identity pattern.
The members of the Internship Review Committee reflected upon the content of the review, the language and tonality, the process of review submission and other data (e.g. from mentoring, local chapter meet, email discussions, one on one discussions with any Fellows,) available, if any. The process also included what feelings and thoughts were experienced by the members during the process.
All individual reflections were discussed, reviewed and finalsed on consensus. At the end, members also reflected upon the general theme of the collective as has emerged from the reviews, what kind of psychological landscapes that have emerged from the internship community. We also looked at what are the patterns of relatedness with self, with personal context and with other significant systems, including Sumedhas have surfaced.
Lastly, the entire process is critiqued and reflected by the members. The critique focused on any significant experience of the process that needed to be noted and reviewed and any significant discovery for the members and the institution.
Most of participants sent in their reviews (all in phase II). The landscape as the committee experienced from the internship community through this process:
For Phase I, some reviews of matter of fact, some were poignant, authentic and some were narratives of one’s life space. The landscape showed that some significant patterns seem to be finding release from social and self imposed norms for the self and hence release from past patterns, some experimentation with interface management, some anchoring in the insights generated in the lab, and some new actions. The idea of self still however, remains caught in criticality as in "what of my parts need to be corrected, which behaviour is acceptable and continuous improvement is the key to this journey that has started for me". They may also be saying that the experience of the self is essentially as a victim, as in exile, as an actor on stage or as a spectator. The relationship with systems is nebulous at this point of time.
For Phase II, focus is more on the relationship with various systems. Poignant view of the self, struggles come through in most cases, honest, authentic and genuine but again, the experience of self as comes through from the review is of outsiders, victims, orphans and spectators. There are intents to engage with the system but more from the location of "if i want to be part of the other, i must contribute or take roles in a way that is useful and acceptable; for just being me is not a tenable proposition". The same philosophy is extended towards the system as well, i.e. "if this has to be a part of me, it must shed all those aspects that are terrorising for me". However, “what is being me” or what are the terrorising aspects of the system don’t come through clearly. As a result, neither the system nor the self can ever be ready to have a union with one another.

Relationship with Sumedhas as a system is held in multiple ways

“finally found a place where I can just be and hence I can take some liberties in the system. I don’t have to compel myself to do something, or to be someone else in this place.” (displayed in sending reviews late, promising but not sending, not responding to mail, etc)
this is a space which has given me new birth and is like a primary system and I feel more accepted and comfortable being in its fold.
this is a space which has given me new insights, new discoveries and new freedom. I feel most grateful to this space and to the collective.
“I would like to be part of Sumedhas but my membership should come through useful and significant contribution”. What remains unstated are any or all criticisms about the space and its members, any intended dialogue that one would like to start in Sumedhas, and what are the processes in the institution and in the organisation that one would like to actively engage with, etc.
lastly, both Sumedhas and any other systems come across as spaces “that I can interact with, receive from, offer my contribution to , adjust, fit in, be watchful about, learn from, observe” but not spaces “that I can actively shape and take a risk with”.

Our experience of the process:

We found ourselves fairly efficient, collaborative and functional with some challenges here and there. What remained somewhat absent were creativity, fun and challenging one another’s thoughts and perception to make the process more alive. Our own personal themes and unconscious processes remained somewhat undiscussed, although it is an important part of the process.
Secondly, we reflected on whether at Sumedhas our focus was more on efficient delivery and whether our struggles of both at institutional and at organisation levels therefore remain invisible to the internship community. We also reflected that while it may be so, the current macro context has a tremendous pull towards engaging with only that part of the system that is relevant and/or useful to me. This may be applied both to Sumedhas Fellows as well as the internship community.
Time and incumbency were the other factors as it raised questions about being conscious about group think, etc.
It is proposed that next year onwards; this process would be given more time and would include at least one or two more members either as invitees or as part of the committee.

**********************

Sharabori Gomes