ಅನುಭವದಿಂದ ಬಂದ ಅರ್ಥ

ಇನ್ನೆರಡು-ಮೂರು ದಿನಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಚಾಂದ್ರಮಾನ ಯುಗಾದಿ ಹಬ್ಬ. ಮತ್ತೊಂದು ಹದಿನೈದು ದಿನದಲ್ಲಿ ಸೌರಮಾನ ಯುಗಾದಿ ಹಬ್ಬ. ಯುಗಾದಿ ಹಬ್ಬವೆಂದರೆ ಹಿಂದೆಲ್ಲಾ ಒಬ್ಬಟ್ಟು-ಹೋಳಿಗೆಗಳ ಹಬ್ಬ ಆಗಿತ್ತು. ಹೌದು, ಒಬ್ಬಟ್ಟಿಗೂ ಹೋಳಿಗೆಗೂ ಏನು ವ್ಯತ್ಯಾಸ? ಹೆಚ್ಚಿನ ಜನಕ್ಕೆ ಎರಡೂ ಒಂದೇ! ನೋಡಲು ಚಪಾತಿಯಂತೆ ಇರುತ್ತದೆ. ಆದರೆ ತಿಂದರೆ ಸಿಹಿ. ಅಷ್ಟೇ ಅಲ್ಲವೇ? ಹಿಂದೆಲ್ಲ ಬೇಳೆಯಿಂದ ಮಾಡಿದ ಹೂರಣವಿದ್ದರೆ ಒಬ್ಬಟ್ಟು ಎನ್ನುತ್ತಿದ್ದರು. ತೆಂಗಿನಕಾಯಿ ಹೂರಣದಿಂದ ಮಾಡಿದರೆ ಹೋಳಿಗೆ ಅನ್ನುತ್ತಿದ್ದರು. ಇದನ್ನು ಮಾಡಲು ಹಾಕುವುದು ಮುಖ್ಯವಾಗಿ ಮೂರು ಪದಾರ್ಥ. ಹಿಟ್ಟು, ಬೇಳೆ ಅಥವಾ ತೆಂಗಿನಕಾಯಿ ಮತ್ತು ಬೆಲ್ಲ. (ಏಲಕ್ಕಿ, ಅರಿಸಿನ, ಸ್ವಲ್ಪವೇ ಬಳಸುವ ಎಣ್ಣೆ ಮತ್ತು ಕೆಲವರು ಹಾಕುವ ಉಪ್ಪನ್ನು ಆಟಕ್ಕುಂಟು, ಲೆಕ್ಕಕ್ಕಿಲ್ಲ ಎಂದು ಬಿಡೋಣ). ಹೊರಗಡೆಯ ಹಿಟ್ಟಿನ ಹೊದಿಕೆ. ಒಳಗಡೆ ಬೇಳೆ-ಬೆಲ್ಲದ ಅಥವಾ ಕಾಯಿ-ಬೆಲ್ಲದ ಹೂರಣ. ಹೀಗಿರುತ್ತಿತ್ತು ಮನೆಯಲ್ಲಿ ಮಾಡಿದ ಒಬ್ಬಟ್ಟು ಅಥವಾ ಹೋಳಿಗೆಯ ಲಕ್ಷಣಗಳು. 

ಪಾವಕ ಅಂದರೆ ಅಗ್ನಿ. ಅಗ್ನಿ ಅಂದರೆ ಪಾವಕ. ಒಟ್ಟಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಎರಡೂ ಬೆಂಕಿ. ಕೋಶಗಳನ್ನು ನೋಡಿದರೆ ಹೀಗೆಯೇ ಅರ್ಥ ಸಿಗುತ್ತದೆ. ಆದರೆ ವಾಸ್ತವವಾಗಿ ಪಾವಕ ಅಗ್ನಿಯ ಮಗ. ಇಬ್ಬರಿಗೂ ಸುಡುವ ಗುಣ ಉಂಟು. ಆದ್ದರಿಂದ ಎರಡೂ ಒಂದೇ ಅನ್ನುತ್ತದೆ ಕೋಶ. ಪ್ರಾಯಶಃ ಬೆಂಕಿಯಲ್ಲಿಟ್ಟ ಹೆಂಚಿನ ಅಥವಾ ಕಾವಲಿಯ ಮೇಲೆ ಬೇಯುವ ಒಬ್ಬಟ್ಟು ಅಥವಾ ಹೋಳಿಗೆಗೂ ಇದೇ ರೀತಿ ಒಂದೇ ಎಂದು ಬಂದಿರಬಹುದು. 

ಈಗ "ಹೋಳಿಗೆ ಮನೆ" ಕಾಲ. ಎಲ್ಲೆಲ್ಲೂ ಹೋಳಿಗೆ ಮನೆಗಳು ಕಾಣುತ್ತವೆ. ಮನೆಯಲ್ಲಿ ಹೋಳಿಗೆ ಮಾಡುವ ಕಾಲವಲ್ಲ. ಆದ್ದರಿಂದ ಉಗಾದಿಗೂ ಹೋಳಿಗೆಗೂ ಸಂಬಂಧ ಮೊದಲಿನಂತೆ ಬಿಗಿಯಿಲ್ಲ. ಮೊದಲಿನ ಮದುವೆಗಳ ಬಿಗಿ ಈಗಿನ ಮದುವೆಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಇಲ್ಲ ಎನ್ನುವಂತೆ. (ಈಗಿನವರು ಇದನ್ನು ಒಪ್ಪದಿರಬಹುದು. ಅದು ಅವರ ಹಕ್ಕು.). ವಾರಕ್ಕೆ ಏಳು ದಿನವೂ, ವರುಷಕ್ಕೆ ಹನ್ನೆರಡು ತಿಂಗಳೂ ಹೋಳಿಗೆ ಲಭ್ಯವೇ. ಅಷ್ಟೇ ಅಲ್ಲ. ಖರ್ಜುರದ ಜೋಳಿಗೆಯಿಂದ ಕುಂಬಳಕಾಯಿ ಹೋಳಿಗೆಯವರೆಗೆ ಎಲ್ಲವೂ ಸಿಗುತ್ತದೆ. ಹಾಗಲಕಾಯಿ ಹೋಳಿಗೆ ಕಂಡಿಲ್ಲ. ಪ್ರಾಯಶಃ ಮುಂದೆ ಬರಬಹುದು. ಅಥವಾ ಬಂದಿದ್ದರೂ ನಮ್ಮ ತಿಳುವಳಿಕೆ ಕಡಿಮೆಯಿರಬಹುದು. 

*****

ನಮ್ಮ ಬಾಲ್ಯದಲ್ಲಿ ಯುಗಾದಿಗೂ, ವಾರ್ಷಿಕ ಪರೀಕ್ಷೆಗಳಿಗೂ ಬಹಳ ಹತ್ತಿರದ ನಂಟು. ಚಾಂದ್ರಮಾನ ಯುಗಾದಿ ಸಾಮಾನ್ಯವಾಗಿ ಮಾರ್ಚ್ ತಿಂಗಳ ಕೊನೆಯಲ್ಲಿ ಅಥವಾ ಏಪ್ರಿಲ್ ಮೊದಲ ಭಾಗದಲ್ಲಿ ಬರುತ್ತದೆ. ಆಗ ಏಪ್ರಿಲ್ ಹತ್ತರಿಂದ ಬೇಸಿಗೆ ರಜೆ ಇರುತ್ತಿತ್ತು. ಅದಕ್ಕೆ ಮುಂಚೆ ವಾರ್ಷಿಕ ಪರೀಕ್ಷೆ. ಅಂದರೆ ಯುಗಾದಿಗೆ ಹಿಂದೆ-ಮುಂದೆ. ಇದೊಂದು ರೀತಿಯಲ್ಲಿ ಒಬ್ಬಟ್ಟಿಗೂ ಪರೀಕ್ಷೆಗಳಿಗೂ ನಂಟು ತಂದಂತಿತ್ತು. 

ಅನೇಕ ಮನೆಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಮೊದಲ ದಿನ ಒಬ್ಬಟ್ಟು ತಯಾರಿಸಿ ಎರಡನೇ ದಿನ ಹೋಳಿಗೆ ಮಾಡುತ್ತಿದ್ದರು. ಕೆಲವರು ಎರಡನ್ನೂ ಒಂದೇ ದಿನ ಮಾಡುತ್ತಿದ್ದುದೂ ಉಂಟು. ಎರಡನ್ನೂ ಒಂದೇ ದಿನ ಮಾಡಿದಾಗ ಊಟಕ್ಕೆ ಕುಳಿತಾಗ ಧರ್ಮಸಂಕಟ. ಯಾವುದನ್ನೂ ತಿನ್ನುವುದು? ಇವುಗಳ ಸರದಿ ಬರುವ ವೇಳೆಗೆ ಇನ್ನು ಬೇರೆ ಪದಾರ್ಥಗಳೆಲ್ಲ ಹೊಟ್ಟೆ ಸೇರಿ ಮಿಕ್ಕಿದ್ದ ಜಾಗ ಕಡಿಮೆ. ಅದಕ್ಕೂ ಅಮ್ಮಂದಿರು ಉಪಾಯ ಹೇಳುತ್ತಿದ್ದರು. ಅವು ರೆಫ್ರಿಜಿರೇಟರ್ ಇಲ್ಲದ ದಿನಗಳು. ಬೇಳೆ ಒಬ್ಬಟ್ಟು ಹೆಚ್ಚು ದಿನ ಇಡಲಾಗುವುದಿಲ್ಲ. ಕಾಯಿ ಹೋಳಿಗೆ ಕೆಲ ದಿನ ಇಡಬಹುದಾಗಿತ್ತು. ಆದ್ದರಿಂದ ಮೊದಲು ಬೇಳೆ ಒಬ್ಬಟ್ಟು. ನಂತರ ಸಂಜೆಯೋ, ಮಾರನೆಯ ದಿನವೋ ಕಾಯಿ ಹೋಳಿಗೆ. ಬಕಾಸುರನ ಸಂತತಿಯವರು ಎರಡನ್ನೂ ಎರಡು, ಮೂರು ದಿನ ಒಟ್ಟಿಗೆ ಸೇವಿಸುವ ಸೌಭಾಗ್ಯ ಹೊಂದಿದ್ದರು. 

*****

ಅದು ಹೋಳಿಗೆ ಇರಲಿ, ಒಬ್ಬಟ್ಟೀ ಇರಲಿ, ತಯಾರಿಸಲು ಮೈದಾ ಹಿಟ್ಟಿನ ಕಣಕ ಬೇಕೇ ಬೇಕು. ಕಣಕದ ಉಂಡೆಯನ್ನು ಲಟ್ಟಿಸಿ ಅಗಲ ಮಾಡಿ, ಅದರೊಳಗೆ ಹೂರಣದ ಉಂಡಿಯಿಟ್ಟು ಸುತ್ತಿ, ಮತ್ತೆ ಲಟ್ಟಿಸಿ ಅಗಲ ಮಾಡಿ ಕಾದ ಹೆಂಚಿನ ಮೇಲೆ ಬೇಯಿಸಿ ತಯಾರಿಸಬೇಕು. ತಿನ್ನುವವರಿಗೆ ಬಲು ಸಿಹಿ. ಆದರೆ ಮಾಡುವವರಿಗೆ ಬಲು ರೇಜಿಗೆಯ ಕೆಲಸ. ಅದೇನೂ ಉಪ್ಪಿಟ್ಟಿನಂತೆ ಒಮ್ಮೆ ಕೆದಕಿ ಇಡುವ ತಿನಿಸಲ್ಲ. ದೋಸೆಯಂತೆ ಒಂದಾದ ಮೇಲೊಂದು ಗುಂಡಗೆ ಬರೆಯಬೇಕು. ಆಗೆಲ್ಲಾ ಸೌದೆ ಒಲೆಗಳು. ಮಾಡುವವರಿಗೆ ಅವರು ಎಷ್ಟು ಶಾಂತ ಸ್ವಭಾವದವರಾದರೂ ಮಾಡಿ ಮುಗಿಸುವ ವೇಳೆಗೆ ಹೊಗೆಯಿಂದ ಕಣ್ಣು ಕೆಂಪಗಾಗುತ್ತಿದುದು ಸಹಜವೇ! 

ಅಡಿಗೆ ಮಾಡುವವರ ಕಷ್ಟ ಅವರಿಗೇ ಗೊತ್ತು. ಮೊದಲು ಪದಾರ್ಥಗಳನ್ನು ಹೊಂದಿಸಬೇಕು. ಈಗಿನಂತೆ ಆಗ "ಎಲ್ಲ ಕ್ಲೀನ್" ಮಾಡಿದ ಪದಾರ್ಥಗಳು ಸಿಗುತ್ತಿರಲಿಲ್ಲ. ಹೊಂದಿಸಿದ ಪದಾರ್ಥಗಳನ್ನು ಶುದ್ದಿ ಮಾಡಬೇಕು. ನಂತರ ಸಂಸ್ಕರಿಸಿ ಅಡುಗೆ ತಯಾರಿಸಬೇಕು. ಈ ತಿನಿಸು ಮಾಡುವಾಗ ಅಷ್ಟು ಕಣಕ ಮತ್ತು ಅಷ್ಟು ಹೂರಣ ಮಾಡಬೇಕು. ಎಲ್ಲ ಮಾಡಿದ ಮೇಲೆ ಒಮ್ಮೊಮ್ಮೆ ಸ್ವಲ್ಪ ಹೂರಣ ಮಿಗಬಹುದು. ಅಥವಾ ಸ್ವಲ್ಪ ಕಣಕ ಮಿಗಬಹುದು. ಹೂರಣ ಮಿಕ್ಕರೆ ಅದನ್ನೇ ಮಿಠಾಯಿ ತರಹ ಮಾಡಿ ಕೊಡುತ್ತಿದ್ದರು. ಕಣಕ ಮಿಕ್ಕರೆ ಕಷ್ಟವೇ! ಕಡೆಗೆ ಅದನ್ನು ಬಿಸಾಡಲಾರದೆ ಅದನ್ನೇ ಒಂದು ರೊಟ್ಟಿಯಂತೆ ತಟ್ಟಿ ಮುಗಿಸುತ್ತಿದ್ದರು. ಅದು ಹೋಳಿಗೆಯೂ ಅಲ್ಲ; ಒಬ್ಬಟ್ಟೂ ಅಲ್ಲ. ಅದೊಂದು ಕಣಕದ ರೊಟ್ಟಿ. ನೋಡಲು ಬಿಳಿಚಿಕೊಂಡ ಒಬ್ಬಟ್ಟಿನಂತೆ. ಏಕೆಂದರೆ ಅದರೊಳಗೆ ಹೂರಣದ ಕೆಂಪಿಲ್ಲ. ಹೂರಣದ ಕಂಪೂ ಇಲ್ಲ. 

ಕೆಲವರು ಮಾತಾಡುವಾಗ ಅವರ ಮಾತಿನ ರೀತಿ ಹೋಳಿಗೆಯಂತೆ ಇರುತ್ತದೆ. ಅವರ ಮಾತಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಒಂದು ರೀತಿಯ ಮೋಡಿ, ಒಂದು ಅರ್ಥ, ಒಂದು ಸೊಗಸು ಇರುತ್ತದೆ. ಒಂದು ಒಬ್ಬಟ್ಟು ತಿಂದ ನಂತರ ಇನ್ನೊಂದು ತಿನ್ನಲು ಆಸೆ ಆಗುವಂತೆ ಒಂದು ಮಾತು ಕೇಳಿದ ನಂತರ ಇನ್ನಷ್ಟು ಕೇಳಬೇಕು ಅನ್ನಿಸುತ್ತದೆ. ಮತ್ತೆ ಕೆಲವರು ಹಾಗಲ್ಲ. ಕೇವಲ ಮಾತು, ಅಷ್ಟೇ. ಮುಗಿದರೆ ಸಾಕು ಅನ್ನಿಸುತ್ತದೆ. "ಅವನ ಮಾತಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಏನೂ ಹೂರಣವಿಲ್ಲ" ಅನ್ನುವುದು ಇದರಿಂದ ಬಂದದ್ದು. ಅಂತಹವರ ಮಾತು ಕಣಕದ ರೊಟ್ಟಿಯಂತೆ. ಬರೀ ಶಬ್ದಗಳು. ಅರ್ಥವಿಲ್ಲದ ಶಬ್ದಗಳಷ್ಟೇ. "ಒಡಕು ಮಡಕೆಗೆ ಕಲ್ಲು ಹಾಕಿದಂತೆ" ಅನ್ನುತ್ತಿದ್ದರು. ಅಂತಹವರು ಹೋದ ಮೇಲೆ "ಸದ್ಯ, ಮಳೆ ನಿಂತಿತು" ಎಂದು ನಿಟ್ಟುಸಿರು ಬಿಡುತ್ತಿದ್ದರು.  

*****  

ಅಂತೂ ರೇಜಿಗೆಯ ಕೆಲಸ ಮುಗಿಸಿ ಒಬ್ಬಟ್ಟು, ಹೋಳಿಗೆ ತಯಾರಿಸಿದ್ದಾಯಿತು. ಜೊತೆಗೆ ಒಂದು ಕಣಕದ ರೊಟ್ಟಿಯೂ ಬಂದಿದೆ. ತಯಾರು ಮಾಡಿದ್ದನ್ನು ಸದುಪಯೋಗ ಮಾಡಬೇಕಲ್ಲ. ಅದಕ್ಕೇ ತಿನ್ನುವ ವಿಧಾನದ ಕಡೆಗೆ ಹೋಗೋಣ. 

ಅದೇನು? ತಿನ್ನುವ ವಿಧಾನ? ಎಂದು ಕೆಲವರು ಮುಖ ಸಿಂಡರಿಸಬಹುದು. ತಿನ್ನುವ ರೀತಿಯಲ್ಲಿ ಕೆಲಬಲರು ಕೆಲ ರೀತಿ ಅನುಸರಿಸುತ್ತಾರೆ. ಕೆಲವರಿಗೆ ಹೋಳಿಗೆಯಷ್ಟೇ ಸಾಕು. ಮತ್ತೆ ಕೆಲವರಿಗೆ ಅದರ ಜೊತೆ ಸ್ವಲ್ಪ (ಧಾರಾಳವಾಗಿಯೇ ಅನ್ನಿ) ತುಪ್ಪ ಬೇಕು. ಮತ್ತೆ ಕೆಲವರಿಗೆ ಅದರ ಜೊತೆ ಬಿಸಿ ಹಾಲು ಬೇಕು. ಇನ್ನೂ ಕೆಲವರಿಗೆ ಸ್ವಲ್ಪ ತುಪ್ಪ, ಅದರ ಮೇಲೆ ಅಷ್ಟು ಹಾಲು ಬೇಕು. ಜೇನಿನ ರುಚಿ ಕಂಡವರಿಗೆ (ಅದರಲ್ಲೂ ಡಯಾಬಿಟಿಸ್ ಇರುವವರಿಗೆ!) ಇವುಗಳ ಜೊತೆ ಸ್ವಲ್ಪ ಹೆಜ್ಜೇನು. (ಹೆಜ್ಜೇನು ಅಂತ ಈಗ ಸಿಗುವುದಿಲ್ಲ. ಅದು ವಿಶೇಷವಾಗಿ ಮಲೆನಾಡಿನ ದಟ್ಟ ಕಾಡಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಸಂಪಾದಿಸಿ ತಂದಿರುತ್ತಿದ್ದುದು). 

ಒಟ್ಟಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಐದು ಬಗೆಯ ತಿನ್ನುವ ರೀತಿ ಆಯಿತು:

• ಕೇವಲ ಕಣಕದ ರೊಟ್ಟಿ. ಇದನ್ನು ತಿಂದದ್ದೇ ಭಾಗ್ಯ. ತಿಂದ ಕೆಲಸವಾಯಿತು. ಹೊಟ್ಟೆ ತುಂಬಿತು. ಮತ್ತೇನೂ ಪ್ರಯೋಜನವಿಲ್ಲ. 
• ಕೇವಲ ಹೋಳಿಗೆ ಮಾತ್ರ. ಹೊಟ್ಟೆಯೂ ತುಂಬಿತು. ಸ್ವಲ್ಪ ರುಚಿಯೂ ಸಿಕ್ಕಿತು. 
• ಹೋಳಿಗೆಯ ಜೊತೆ ಅಷ್ಟು ತುಪ್ಪ. ಇದರಲ್ಲಿ ವಿಶೇಷ ಅನ್ನಿಸುವ ಹೆಚ್ಚಿನ ಮಟ್ಟದ ಅನುಭವ. 
• ಹೋಳಿಗೆಯ ಮೇಲೆ ತುಪ್ಪ. ಅದರ ಮೇಲೆ ಬಿಸಿ ಹಾಲು. ಈಗ ಪೂರ್ಣ ಪ್ರಮಾಣದ ಅಧಿಕ ಎನಿಸುವ ಅನುಭವ ಉಂಟಾಯಿತು. 
• ಹೋಳಿಗೆಯ ಮೇಲೆ ತುಪ್ಪ. ಮೇಲೆ ಬಿಸಿ ಹಾಲು. ಒಂದಷ್ಟು ಜೇನು ತುಪ್ಪ. ಏನು ಸಾಧ್ಯವೋ ಎಲ್ಲವೂ ಮೇಳೈಸಿವೆ. ಇದಕ್ಕಿಂತ ಹೆಚ್ಚಿನ ರುಚಿ ಇನ್ನಿಲ್ಲ. ಆಹಾರ, ಪೋಷಕಾಂಶ, ರುಚಿ ಎಲ್ಲವೂ ದೊರಕಿತು. 

*****

"ಬಾಹ್ಯಾರ್ಥ - ಅಂತರಾರ್ಥ - ಗೂಡಾರ್ಥ" ಎನ್ನುವ ಶೀರ್ಷಿಕೆಯಡಿ ಹಿಂದೊಂದು ಸಂಚಿಕೆಯಲ್ಲಿ ಬಗೆಬಗೆಯ ಸಾಹಿತ್ಯ ಕೃತಿಗಳನ್ನು ಓದಿದಾಗ ಆಗುವ ಅನುಭವಗಳು ಮತ್ತು ಅರ್ಥ ವಿಶೇಷಗಳ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಚರ್ಚೆ ಮಾಡಿದ್ದೆವು. (ಮತ್ತೆ ಓದಬೇಕಾಗಿದ್ದರೆ ಇಲ್ಲಿ ಕ್ಲಿಕ್ ಮಾಡಿ). ಆದರಲ್ಲಿ ಹೊರಗಿನ ಅರ್ಥ, ಒಳಗಿನ ಅರ್ಥ ಮತ್ತು ಸಾಮಾನ್ಯವಾಗಿ ತಿಳಿಯಲಾಗದ ವಿಶೇಷಾರ್ಥ (ಗೂಡಾರ್ಥ) ಇವುಗಳ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಮತ್ತು ಇವುಗಳಲ್ಲಿರುವ ವ್ಯತ್ಯಾಸಗಳ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ನೋಡಿದ್ದೆವು. ಆ ಸಂಬಂಧದ ಎಲ್ಲ ವಿಷಯಗಳನ್ನೂ ಈ ಹೋಳಿಗೆ ತಿನ್ನುವ ವಿಧಾನಕ್ಕೆ ಹೋಲಿಸಬಹುದು:

• ಭಾಷೆ ಬರುತ್ತದೆ ಎಂದು ಸುಮ್ಮನೆ ಓದಿದರೆ ಅದು ಕಣಕದ ರೊಟ್ಟಿ ತಿಂದಂತೆ. ಏನೂ ಅರ್ಥವಾಗಲಿಲ್ಲ. 
• ಬಾಹ್ಯಾರ್ಥ ತಿಳಿಯುವಂತೆ ಓದಿದರೆ ಅದು ಕೇವಲ ಹೋಳಿಗೆ ತಿಂದಂತೆ. ಸ್ವಲ್ಪ ಅರ್ಥವಾಯಿತು. 
• ಅಂತರಾರ್ಥ ತಿಳಿಯುವಂತೆ ಓದಿದರೆ ಹೋಳಿಗೆಯ ಜೊತೆ ತುಪ್ಪವೂ ಸೇರಿದಂತೆ ಹೆಚ್ಚಿನ ಪ್ರಯೋಜನ ಆಯಿತು. 
• ಬಾಹ್ಯಾರ್ಥ, ಅಂತರಾರ್ಥ, ಗುಹ್ಯರ್ಥಗಳು ತಿಳಿದರೆ ಹೋಳಿಗೆ, ತುಪ್ಪ, ಹಾಲು ಸೇರಿದಂತೆ. ಪೂರ್ಣ ಪ್ರಯೋಜನ ಸಿಕ್ಕಿತು. 
• ಈ ಮೂರೂ ಅರ್ಥಗಳ ಜೊತೆಗೆ ಅನುಭವದ ಅರ್ಥ ಸೇರಿದರೆ ಹೋಳಿಗೆ, ತುಪ್ಪ, ಹಾಲು ಇವುಗಳ ಜೊತೆ ಹೆಜ್ಜೇನು ಕೂಡಿದಂತೆ. ಅದೊಂದು ಪರಮ ಗತಿಯ ಅನುಭವ ಕೊಡುವ ಪೂರ್ಣ ಅರ್ಥ. 

*****

ಈ ಅನುಭವದ ಹೆಜ್ಜೇನು, ಅದರ ಎರಡು ಮುಖಗಳಾದ "ಸ್ವಾನುಭವ" ಮತ್ತು "ಪರಾನುಭವ", ಇವುಗಳ ವಿಷಯವನ್ನು ಉದಾಹರಣೆಗಳ ಮೂಲಕ ಮುಂದಿನ ಸಂಚಿಕೆಯಲ್ಲಿ ನೋಡೋಣ. 

Knowledge and Experience

Bheeshma was lying on the bed of arrows in the middle of Kurukshetra battlefield. The arrows that had pierced his body were shot at him by by his own grandson, Arjuna. Bheeshma was blessed with the boon of choosing the time of his death. Bheeshma decided to wait on the bed of arrows for some more time, however painful it were, before welcoming his death and renounce the physical body.

Bheeshma's entire life was a web of curses and a boon. Many curses combined together behind this one boon to dictate the events in his life. Some of these curses were taking shape even before his birth itself! Considered as one of the foremost warriors of his era, he was witness to many events during his life time. While lying on the bed of arrows, he reflected on the events of his life and the reasons for which he had to face the long wait. Two reasons are given for his long wait.

***** 

Lord Brahma was taking a walk along the seashore. Lord Varuna, Lord of the ocean, suddenly came up with big waves and sprayed water on him. Brahma became enraged, told him to calm down and said - Shanto Bhava - (शान्तो भव). Coupled with this, there was another curse on him and Ganga, the divine river. During a celebration in the court of Lord Indra, he was continuously staring at Ganga when her shoulder garment was blown away by the wind while all others looked elsewhere. Ganga was also staring at him. Brahma cursed them to be born on earth and live as man and wife. Varuna took birth as Shantanu, a name derived from the first curse. He met Ganga and asked her to be his wife. Ganga accepted on the condition that he would not question her on any of her actions. The day he questions her, she would be free to dissolve the marriage and go away. The two curses brought them together on the earth as Shantanu and Ganga.

Eight brothers, known as Ashta (eight) Vasus, went to the hermitage of Sage Vasishta. They were well looked after by the sage and treated with all comforts despite living in the forest. The Vasus learnt that all this was due to a sacred cow in the custody of the sage. The youngest brother was tempted by his wife to take away the cow from the sage. Other seven brothers assisted him. The sage cursed them to be born on the earth. The eight brothers repented and begged the sage's mercy. The sage somewhat relented and reduced the rigour of the curse for the seven brothers who only assisted in the attempted crime. They would be born on earth, but get released immediately due to their death, he said. The last brother who was the main offender would however have to lead a full life on earth, he insisted. These eight brothers were born as the sons of Shantanu and Ganga.

As soon as a child was born, Ganga would take it and throw it in the river. Shantanu could not question her as per their arrangement arrived at before the marriage. Seven sons were thus killed. When the eighth son was born, Shantanu could not hold back and stopped Ganga from the child being thrown in the river. Ganga handed over this eighth son, named Devavrata, to Shantanu, dissolved the marriage and left. 

Devavrata was educated by many a stalwarts; he was a student of Brihaspati, the Guru of the Devas, Shukracharya, the Guru of the Demons, Sages Vasishta, Chyavana and Markandeya. He learnt the secrets of archery and warfare from Lord Parashurama. He became a treasure of knowledge and the most learned man of his time.

Meanwhile Shantanu fell in love with Satyavati, the daughter of Daasha Raja. Daasha Raja was agreeable to offer her in marriage but wanted her son to succeed Shantanu as the King. Devavrata being the elder son was now standing between the marriage and the throne. Shantanu did not want to deny Devavrata's rights. But Devavrata found the reason for his father's sadness and persuaded Daasha Raja for the marriage. He told Daasha Raja that he would forego his claim to the throne and Satyavati's son would be the King. Daasha Raja was not satisfied with this offer. What would happen if Devavrata's children claimed the throne in due course? Devavrata went a step further. He promised Daasha Raja that he would never marry and remain a bachelor for the rest of his life! This removed the final hurdle and Satyavati married Shantanu. Devavrata was now known as "Bheeshma" due to his vow to remain a bachelor for the rest of his time and defend the Hastinapur throne as a dedicated protector.

Bheeshma was now tied to the Hastinapur throne by his own vow. He abducted three daughters of the King of Kashi to get them married to his step brother Vichitraveerya. Eldest of them, Amba, was in love with another King, Salva, and therefore was released by Bheeshma. Salva refused to marry her after the abduction. She returned and demanded that Bheeshma marry her. Bheeshma cited his vow and refused. Amba went to Bheeshma's Guru Parushurama and sought his help. Having refused the Guru's advice to marry her due to his vow, Bheeshma had to reluctantly fight his own Guru Parushurama. After more than three weeks of fighting, it was declared as a draw. Amba now took birth as Shikhandi with the sole goal of becoming the reason for Bheeshma's death. Arjuna used Shikhandi as a shield and felled Bheeshma on the bed of arrows.

Lying on the bed of arrows, Bheeshma was reviewing all happenings in his life. Karna had the sympathy of all for his misfortune, but his own misfortune was far greater than that of Karna. He could not even breathe his last as there was one more duty that he had to perform.

*****

What are the two reasons for his long wait on the bed of arrows? First reason given is that he waited for Uttarayana Punyakala, the time when the Sun starts his journey northwards. The second reason given is that he had to wait for the conclusion of the war and satisfy himself that the throne of Hastinapur was safe. Both were minor reasons. The belief that those who die in Uttarayana alone go to heaven is not true. Reaching heaven or hell is purely dependant on ones own deeds during the life time. Only the paths traced for the onward journey during Uttarayana and Dakshinayana are different and it does not affect the final destination. Otherwise half the people can never reach heaven as they die in Dakshinayana. As regards safety of the throne, it was well known that Pandavas would ultimately win the war and Yudhishtira would occupy the throne at the conclusion of the war. This being the case what was the real secret behind Bheeshma's long wait?

Once the war is concluded and Yudhishtira is anointed as the King, Krishna brings the new King and his brothers to Kurukshetra battlefield to meet Bheeshma. Bheeshma recites "Vishnu Sahasranaama" and seeks Krishna's permission to welcome his death. The discussion between Bheeshma and Krishna goes thus:

"Pitamah (Grandfather), you are the treasure house of all knowledge in the world. There is no other person on this earth who has amassed the amount of knowledge as you have done. The list of your Gurus itself is a testimony to this. You have one real reason for holding your life till now. Your exemplary knowledge should not go waste. King Yudhishtira is the right person to receive this treasure. Please advise him urgently when you are still here".

"Krishna, when you are yourself present here and advising Pandavas, who am I to advise Yudhishtira?"

"I may have the knowledge. I do not have your experience. Mere knowledge is not enough. Experience is equally valuable. Furthermore, your knowledge and experience should pass on especially to your successors in the family. Please pass on your knowledge and experience to him before you embrace your death".

Bheeshma duly obliged and advised Yudhishtira at length. His advice is recorded in the latter part of Mahabharata. Once the duty was completed, he renounced the human body and concluded his life's journey.

*****

This has a great lesson for all of us. Knowledge is indeed important. Experience is equally important. Knowledge and experience are to be passed on to the next generation. That ensures continuity. And thus life goes on.....

Pythagoras or Baudhayana?

The Indian Science Congress Association, together with the University of Mumbai, recently arranged the 102nd Indian Science Congress 2015, at the University's Kalina campus in Mumbai.  The objective of the congress was to provide a platform for challengers to connect with creators to inspire future possibilities and bring them to life.  The event was inaugurated by the Union Minister for Science and Technology, Sri Harsh Vardhan on 3rd January, 2015.  While delivering the inaugural speech, drawing attention to ancient Indian sciences, he said, "Our scientists discovered the Pythagoras theorem but we sophistically gave its credit to Greeks.  We all know we knew "Beej Ganit" much before the Arabs, but very selflessly allowed it to be called Algebra."  This was enough to kindle a debate on the issue. Two groups dutifully endorsed and opposed what the minister said. Even as one of the groups was ridiculing the statement, Sri Shashi Tharoor, former Union Minister, endorsed the minister's observation, albeit in guarded language. The debate about Algebra and Geometry in particular, and Mathematics and Science in general, begs for deeper understanding and civilized behavior.  But it has unfortunately turned out to be "Pythagoras v/s Baudhayana".

Who was this Baudhayana?  What was his contribution to Mathematics?  When and where did he live?  Is there any truth in the claims that he was the original author or finder of the theorem?  These questions demand some consideration to understand the whole issue in proper perspective.

Baudhayana is believed to have lived during the 8th century before Christ (800 BC) in the area between present Eastern Uttar Pradesh and Bihar.  He is said to belong to the Krishna Yajurveda Taittariya shakha (branch).  Some also claim that he belonged to Shukla Yajurveda shakha.  He is respected and remembered even today.  The third "New Moon Day" (Amavasya in the month of Jyeshta) of the lunar calendar is known by his name as "Baudhayana Amavasya".  His Baudhayana Sutras are well known and a source of valuable knowledge to mankind. Apastamba, another sutrakara (author of sutras or formulae) who lived around 600 BC has improved on the sutras of Baudhayana.  Sutras are appendices to the Vedic texts and provide rules for constructions of altars for Havans and Yagnas, the sacred rituals. These sutras give the formulae and do not give proof in detail as is given in modern mathematical books.  Most of the ancient texts are in the form of formulae for easy remembering and passing on the knowledge to the next generations. This is to be understood in the context of the times when paper and printing was not available and the most prominent source of learning was in face-to-face interaction of the "Teacher and the Disciple", as per the "Guru-shishya parampara".

Baudhayana is known for many valuable contributions and three of them are outstanding gifts to sources of knowledge.  In addition to the issue in question (Pythagoras theorem), he has given an approximation of the square root of 2 and finding a circle whose area is equal to that of a given square.  This is something like reverse of squaring a circle.  In his sutras, Baudhayana uses the example of a rope and states that "A rope stretched along the length of the diagonal produces an area which the vertical and horizontal lines make together".  This content is the same as the Pythagoras theorem and hence the claims that he was the founder of the theorem.

Pythagoras is believed to have lived in the 6th century BC (570-495 BC), about two centuries later. He has made invaluable contributions to philosophy and religion. There are claims that Pythagoras was given credit to the theorem known by his name, three centuries later and Euclid is also credited for this theorem.  Who is the original author or finder of this theorem?  Mysore University has recently come out with a software that can find plagiarism and ensure quality research output by Ph D students. Unfortunately, this software cannot be used to settle the issue between Baudhayana, Pythagoras and Euclid!

The solution for the problem is in the Indian way understanding of sources of knowledge itself. Ancient Indian philosophy believes that many strands of truth always exist in the universe and there is nothing called invention as such.  These ever existing truths are found by somebody and the entire mankind benefits from them.  While it is only fair that the first finder should be given credit for his efforts, all the arguments about the first finder only succeed in diverting the spotlight from the basic issue, which is the essence of the truth.  While debating such issues, it is pertinent to remember the following possibilities:

• Same truth could have been found by more than one person at the same time, without knowing about other's efforts.
• Same truth could have been found by more than one person at different times, without knowing about each other, especially in ancient times when flow of information was not as easy as today.
• A seed found by an earlier person might have been developed by a later person adding more dimensions and clarity.

Now that the issue has come to sharper focus, what can be the future course of action? Continuing the arguments with lot of heat is not the answer at all. A clinical study of all the available information without prejudice and due respect to all the past greats and arriving at a conclusion acceptable to all, can be the first step. Respecting all streams of knowledge irrespective of the source is the second. Showing gratitude to all those who have contributed accumulation of knowledge over the years and gifted to us, is the third.

At the beginning of the famous Bruce Lee movie "Enter the Dragon", there is a scene in which Bruce Lee is teaching martial arts to a young student.  Lee points his finger to the moon and tells the student to look at the full moon in the sky, in all his glory.  The boy keeps looking at the finger.  Lee hits the boy on his head and advises him, "Do not look at the finger; look at the moon.  Otherwise you will miss all the beauty of the moon!" 

This argument of Pythagoras v/s Baudhayana is very similar to looking at the finger and missing all the beauty of the full moon in the clear sky.