Wednesday, August 5, 2026
Sophomore
Wednesday, March 26, 2025
ಅನುಭವದಿಂದ ಬಂದ ಅರ್ಥ
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.
Sunday, October 22, 2017
Knowledge and Experience
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.
Sunday, January 11, 2015
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.

