Rajiv

(Year 2050)
I was getting a bit worried, It was almost 9.30 and the train was nowhere in sight. What could have happened my thoughts wander, these ultramodern magnetic cushioned bullets, gushing at 340 kilometers per hour were supposed to solve the distance problem by phasing out the sky trams which due to technical limitations could never achieve speeds above 200 kilometers per hour, though actually, they never ran above 180.

“of course
who can tell about
the Dark, the Un-fathomable”

Ah, there it comes. In 11 minutes, I find myself at the other end of Mumbai. I scramble towards the central tower, (yes this very new 118 storied world trade building) and almost make it in time to get a seat which by the way is always a relief. You never know how long these open forums can drag itself on and on.

The hall as usual is full. And in five minutes Ramesh walks up to the podium and inspects the mike. Hullo hullo

“Ladies and Gentlemen” he begins, “On behalf of India and its people, I welcome Professor Dieter and kindly ask him to grace us with his encyclopedic insight on language and the contribution of Indic linguists to the understanding of man and consciousness in general.
Professor Dieter as you may know is the executive head of AMETH. We today are the children of AMETH. When he was just 19, he revolutionized our world by democratizing the net by evolving an algorithm which was to become the most celebrated rule to this day without which there would be no dispute resolution; Yes ladies and gentlemen, I am speaking about LCB, or the logic of consensus-building.
Just 50 years past, the world was governed by narrow-minded ideological sentimentalism; tinged as these were in petty religious and nationalist feelings. Feelings that threatened to destroy our secure and democratic world by hacking it back into a new dark age.
Today, here at this open forum, you people are been offered a rare opportunity to take over the reigns of interlocutors and Professor Borgmaan would in effect defend his thoughts as has been our tradition which let me remind you embodies the very openness for which the church of AMETH is so famous for all over the world. But before we start, I would like the Professor to speak few words about his recently published multi volume book. “Becoming Human and the End of History“ especially the chapters that deal with the development and contributions of Indic linguists.
Please welcome Professor Dieter M. Borgmaan.”

The Hall woke up to its feet and gave him a standing ovation. And as they hailed him, the Professor got up from his seat and quietly walked to the podium and spoke with his deep and weighted voice, “I am Honored,”  he said. And as the hall quieted down he began his lecture by explaining in simple terms how language came to be derived from mathematics. He then explained that language is always logical and carries in its womb the structure of difference. Hours went by but he kept the crowd on their toes and as the lecture came to its end, a deafening applause broke out and soon intellectuals from all over India were seen shooting sharp and well thought questions which our Professor argued, weighted, cajoled, teased and demolished one after another, And in between these arguments something happened!

**********

Dear reader. I have to pause for my breath here. For something strange happened, something that escapes!!! actually, I am at a complete loss of word, cause what followed next was something just out of the ordinary. Even I, who considers himself a seasoned journalist with an almost perfect recall, am totally at loss to report this remarkable event. I am baffled by this feeling of otherworldly presence. This bizarre and strange! no, no, I think ‘uncanny’ is the right word or may be ‘unusual’. So, please excuse my language if they teeter confused as if lost in the curved and mirrored corridors of some mysterious labyrinth.

So where was I! Yes; as the professor went on demolishing one argument after another, in the middle of all this drama, I noticed a middle aged man in a white kurta and jeans stride past me. He walked straight to the front row where he wrote something on a piece of paper and handed it over to the seated members of the executive board and in few minutes, the mike boy rusheed to him. The man seemed to be in his 40′s. He was soft, may be a bit on the plumb side. He thanked the mike boy and spoke something in Sanskrit, and to every ones surprise, the Professor acknowledged him in perfect Sanskrit.

“Professor Dieter,” the stranger spoke in clear english. “In book 2 of your newly published studies, you spend almost 50 pages analysing the war of the ten kings though king seems to be an unfortunate translation, nevertheless, in book 5, you return back claiming that the defeat of the ten was a sad event which seems to have forced India to loose its most precious insight which later only the Greeks came to master. You write, almost in messianic terms quoting a very famous 20th century philosopher that ‘…in the Greek being, there arises from and against the nationalist and traditionalist boundaries of Greece a singular nation of the people. A transcending for the first time which opens up a world of universal pertinence, beyond specific culture and histories, a universal science which the western humanity bears within itself, this idea by which the west distinguishes itself from the merely empirical type, for example China and India.’
‘Its’ the stranger continues quoting from the Professors book, ‘an establishment which comes to modernity as an irruption; intimately involved with the outbreak of this irruption, a new sort of attitude of individual towards their surrounding world, and with this changed attitude, mankind leaves its finite and banal humanity behind, and raises itself to a mankind of infinite task, to humanity struggling to understand itself. By virtue of the conception of the world unfettered by myth, god and its whole tradition -absolutely free from prejudice, constituted by the telos of an universal science -a humanity with an universal life interest -a self-interest solely interested in its own unique essentiality; as man realized, unbound in his new form, and in the greatness of its inner purity.’
In the last chapter of book five you assert that Gandhi was wrong in claiming that, ‘…every culture is defined, and governed by its own unique outlook and so progress and technological development should orient itself to reflect their inner movement, rather than be guided by western moods and their global characteristics. For Gandhi,’ you quote a famous Gandhian, ‘…the choice for him was not between a traditional technique and a modern technique; it is between different traditions of technology.’ This according to you results in bad faith as it fails to grasp the real, the one and only movement, which also happens to be the sole defining characteristic of our times. Gandhi (characteristically) according to you, fails to see the evolving tangent of history and so misjudges the historical essence -the spirit of modernity.
“Now! allow me to quote you from book 2 (a silence falls over the hall). You write: ‘Yama is the law that binds society, He upholds the higher Law, He is solid and Iron like, nothing can bend him, but society is forever threatened by Jahilya. Yami in contrast to Yama is not strong and iron willed, she slips momentarily into Jahilya, into the traps and seductions of unrestrained selfish individualism. Where Adam caves in, Yama resists and wins Dharma.’ In book 4 you compare her with unrestrained nature and him with civilizing powers: ‘The collective will generated from the flow of ojas that our ancestors have won for us.’ As authority, you claim the Dharamshastras, which is all good and fine. And it is true that some of the Dharamshastras do express their understanding through ‘civilizing exertions’ or the ‘cultivations of restrain’ and even declare Yama to be the sole generator of Dharma.
I want to let you know that I almost find myself in agreement with much of what you have said and written. But in spite of all your scholarship; I contend that you have failed miserably in understanding the real significance of Yami.

“It is true,” he continues “that Yama is called Sun like, shining, illuminating against the yawning backdrop of the dark and utter nothingness. He is Manu, Vivasvat born because his way illuminates. He is called the first man and at the same time a god because as spirit, as the originator of consciousness, his illuminating powers presides over all, it gathers and guides, it shows a way, a path. Things shine and are made visible, and men know what they are supposed to do, and what things they are supposed to avoid. Humans feel secure in such knowing -for to dwell in certainty is rewarding, as one feels at home, because for the homeless, the world is dark and intimidating, lacking in love and care. Indeed Yama is the measure against whose measure all things measure themselves. In every sphere, in every world, Yama’s Laws are found working with their immaculate casual perfection -mathematical like. He after all is Kramapati, the Lord of Sankhya, He who measured himself and ordered once and for all, the laws of Karma. It is well known that Sankhya is the very light released when Indra’s Vajra tore the demon into two, Heaven above, Earth below, and by this single act, an unprecedented discriminative power was won for men. From thereon, truly the hour of man has arrived. The causal laws of reason and logic find their way in the hollow of its opening. As the Lord of Sankhya, he grants man the possibility of building, calculating, and of datability and maintaining accounts -of all sort. As ‘Time‘, he is accountability itself and thus he is the one who measures man and estimates his deed. But. And here I want everyone to get their minds upon something wholly other than him, for he was not alone, not the only light; there was an ‘other‘, an invisible, an emptying, a coring out, space like -a blazing intelligence was released along with him. A feminine twin, a goddess unsurpassed, a dark, hidden, and frightening beauty, a dangerous but also the most excellent, a damsel on par, powerful as Yama. His equal and even in some sense his superior. And she is Yami. She who is measureless, deathless, and infinite.”

“What are you talking about Sir!” the professor interrupted gaffing, “What you are presenting is a fringe view, A view that rest in the prejudices of its people, a view seeping in superstitions and morbid sentimentality. I wish you could be more honest with yourself and rise above your petty nationalism and pseudo-scholarship, they always find their way in topics related to folk history and hagiographic nationalistic tales. Get over it sir, it leads us nowhere and contributes nothing to our knowledge. What Indic scholars lack and what Western scholars have is a certain rigor. I sympathize with your view, they may be well meaning, but at the same time, I can assure you sir that you are clearly uninformed and your methods of scholarship sub-standard.”

“I haven’t yet presented my view, but nevertheless, I would like to know as to what exactly informs your method. Is there anyway to know what a thing is apart from what it means to someone.”

“Sir! in my works I have followed utmost rigor, we have to read the Vedas not from the beliefs held by certain people but against the Vedas themselves. Every word including their etymological derivations are well documented by great scholars, and then there are dictionaries and concordances, and rules of interpretations.”

“But dictionaries themselves are interpretations and in their turn are contingent upon what happens to be informing the lexicographers mind. And in your case they happen to be western linguists translating things for a western audience -restrained by the very demand of their European sensibility. But words sir are not independent of sentences and sentences from their referential totality. The whole sir is always over and above the sum of its parts. So! Is it not true that by particularizing, one always ends up overlooking that which gives its part its particularity; and, is it not also true that discriminative consciousness always and already from the outset only sees what it puts there in the first place -so! what help are these dictionaries and their concordances and their HOMELESS rules of interpretation. Do they not distort the original in the most subtle of ways?”

“Well! I don’t want to get into the doctrine of Spotha here, and as far as I am concerned, it has no factual standing. So, keep things within factual limits and from within these let us know as on what ground do you put a claim to your prejudices?”

“By problematizing your reading of certain texts sir, and by demonstrating that there are no value neutral positions but only biases and prejudices and claims of home and family. Reading and making sense after all never happen in a void, nor are they discovered and reached by totally unknown paths, but all understandings happens to occur within the already given circularity of pre-comprehensions”

“You are wasting our time and patience, but as this is an open forum, I see no one stopping you, so go ahead, and don’t blame me if you are adamant in making a fool of yourself. And please clear up what my interpretation of Yama has to do with the ‘War of the Ten’, and in what manner have I misjudged Yami’s character.”

“I have no wish to waste any of your time, so I will go straight to Hymn 10.10 on book 2 where you assert: Yami who like a fading night whose time is up, tempts Yama (who is like the brilliant light of the day) to commit incest by hailing him ‘come’ have a son, be a father, for we were made for each other and marked to be partners, to be lovers, I your wife and you my husband so were we conceived by the highest power. But Yama declines and in doing so lays the primordial grounds of civilization. By his acts he generates the very first law of man by reminding her that ‘they have called it a sin that a brother should marry his sister’ and through this speech he wins for man the sacred laws of the Aryans.
Seeing him defiant she retorts to lies and he promptly censures her for speaking falsely, and thus ‘truth speaking’ becomes the second defining feature of all cultures. Yami then retorts to seductive speech. ‘I am possessed by love’ she wails, ‘let us lie besides each other hasting like two wheels in the heat of wild passion’, ‘If there be any guilt, that to I take upon me, but come quickly, hold me in tight embrace’, and when she fails in her foul task she faults him of lacking manly virtues; accuses him of being a frightened weakling wanting in both heart and spirit. But Yama restrains and rejects all her moves. Through his restrain, his control and checks, he earns the title of Dharma.
Now sir, you have indeed cut her a pathetic figure, a creature not in her senses, a feminine impulse, a compromising force that willingly undermines the very foundations of civilized world, a seizure that forever threatens to bring it to its knee. And still, in spite of your misreadings, I would like you to know that I don’t wholly disagree with your renderings, but then they are hardly new and for that matter even the ancients looked upon it as you have done, and thus there is not much of a scope here. But, there are many sides to this dialogue, this spiritual exchange between these two primordial spirits, the generators of mankind as Eros and Civilization, but that’s the most obvious part of it all. What is not obvious and for this very reason it might very well be the most likely (as I shall prove) is that she, Yami is indulging in a sisterly tease and as we can read that Yama clearly looks perplexed. Though it is clear from Hymn 10.154 that Yami embodies a very different spiritual order, a way, a path wholly inaccessible to him and I proclaim, that she bears in her womb a cradling insight, an insight clearly superior to his academic, institutionalistic, over archingly duty-bound-capital of customary observances and practices.

“This is most absurd and most silly but I admit, its amusing and quite entertaining. Go ahead, carry on.”

“Thank you! So allow me delve a bit into the prejudice free openings of the Greek. So much rest on just this grand and over arching assertion, so much is at stake. So allow me to have a go at it.”

“Its all yours” the Professor waves his hand uninterested, as if he knew in advance what was coming.

“Prior to the Dasarajna war,” the stranger begins. “One had no real use of something like, say: a ‘‘0’ (zero), It has no real value, for example, there are no ‘0’ (zero) horses, no ‘0’ (zero) revenue, no one ever goes to buy ‘0’ (zero) mangoes, in fact it makes no difference, and contributes nothing to our daily lives.

Most cultures prior to the war either counted using a unary or a binary system, for example a series of 1 makes many. The Egyptian in fact had a highly evolved unary system known as sign-value notation.

Some cultures count by 2’s, they have no system of numbers beyond 2’s, thus 3 would be 2 plus 1 and 4 would be 2 plus 2, 5 would be 2 plus 2 plus1 and so forth. There are many cultures that still count by 3’s or via a ternary system, there are no numbers beyond 3‘s, thus 4 would be 3 plus 1, so on and so forth. For the ternarians, our present day decimal system of 10’s would appear to be unnecessary cumbersome. Interestingly, the most widespread system in ancient times was the quinary or counting by fives and group of fives. Next to it was the senary or heximal system, but the most popular and widely followed among all these were the Germanic system that counted by 10’s, this was different from the Indian numerical as the Germanic system had no sense of the ‘0’ (zero).

In ancient times the most successful was the Sumerian sexagesimal positional numbering system of 60’s. Even today we count our seconds, minutes, hours in 60’s.

In ancient times the most successful was the Sumerian sexagesimal positional numbering system of 60’s. Even today we count our seconds, minutes, hours in 60’s. Though the Sumerian system used ‘0’ (zero), they to had no conceptual sense as to what ‘0’ (zero) stood for in the scheme of things. The Sumerian system were further qualified by 10’s and 12’s. In some villages of France, they still use a vigesimal system. None of these systems had any need of ‘0’ (zero)’s.

The Greeks evolved the Egyptian system of 5‘s, 10’s, 50’s, 100‘s, 500’s by replacing the Egyptian symbols with Ionic alphabets, where each number from 1 to 9 were assigned a separate Greek alphabet, this was repeated for 10 to 90 and further 100 to 900, thus making a total of 27 symbols. This gave them a certain edge, for example: writing the number 87 in an Egyptian system would require 15 symbols, the Greek required only two.

For complex astronomical calculations the Greek freely borrowed from the Sumerian sexagesimal positional numbering system thus introducing ‘0’ (zero)’s. But even the Greeks had no conceptual understanding of the ‘0’ (zero). The Greek worldview had no use of them. They would calculate using the Sumerian system and once done, they would then simply translate the result back into their own.But the Romans who absorbed almost everything that the Greeks ever came up with would digress back to an Egyptian like numericals and the Greek system would ultimately be lost to the Europeans who would end up using the cumbersome Roman numerical.

The Greeks believed that all numbers were in some sense deeply connected with the real world

‘0’ (zero) is a dangerous number, It has uncanny proprieties, it does not behave like rational numbers do. It flouts the very ordering of ratio. Neither addition or subtraction nor multiplication or division behave as they are supposed to. Without the necessary conceptual understanding of the ‘0’ (zero), the Greeks kept tumbling into insurmountable paradoxes. For example: the Zeno’s paradox arise because his inherited sense making, or referential and conceptual framework lacked all mathematical and conceptual sense of ‘0’ (zero); introduce ‘0’ (zero) and his paradoxes cease to be paradoxical. But there are no easy ways to introduce a new conceptual sense, infact, it is almost impossible and demands a slow poetic unfoldment within the very skin of ones ‘received world’, that is within the mercurial folds of ones sensory aparatus. It demands a complete transformation of the body from its very inside, a change at the heart of ones perspective matrix, which in one sense meant the destruction of the collective ways the Greek psyche had overtime come to experience and pose things. But nothing could be worse and threatening than the irrational powers of ‘0’ (zero), and Irrationals kept popping up everywhere in their calculations, but the Greeks did not believe in the reality of the Irrational, Theirs was a perfect world. On the other hand ‘0’ (zero), was found to hold within its indefinable definition (as the irrational never terminate, or repeat) very dangerous and explosive powers.

The Greeks believed that all numbers were in some sense deeply connected with the real world, and if irrational numbers exist as did the rational numbers, then their counterparts were sure to show up in the real world, which according to their world picture was simply impossible, cause it meant that reason and rationality were some how broken and this meant both human nature as well as nature herself had an irrational side to it. Which meant that if we could never come around to define rationally who we are, we will never be able to understand our ‘self’ in an ordered and rational way, which also meant that we would never ever be able to attain a full understanding of our world. It also meant that the world in some sense has no implicit meaning, and existence was after all only a play of appearances, and this would suggest that the universe had no underlying reality beyond this play of appearances. This frightened the wits out of the Greeks and instead of accommodating this uncanny and unpredictable side of reality, they ended up suppressing and banning all references that suggested or hinted about their existence, and they did this with a xenophobic zeal, in fact Pythagoras even declared that none such thing ever exists, and if such a thing ever showed up, then, they did so because they had somehow failed to apply the right method of calculation, which meant that it was just a matter of time before one would find the right one and the anomaly would cease once and for all. But the irrational kept showing up everywhere and refused to be exorcized away.

It was one Hippasus who came up with a working proof and having done so had to pay with his dear life for having proven that their existence were after all provable as was any of the other rational number, and as Pythagoras could not disapprove his findings nor accept them, he had him punished by drowning. Accepting his proof meant destroying the very belief in a perfect and elegant universe. A universe that was supposed to be a handiwork of Divine reason, the word of God.

And behind this demand for pure value independent rigor I contend, lies an ancient bias, a prejudice

The Romans picked it up from the Greeks and via them this ancient prejudice found its way into the middle ages, and in essence this fear of the irrational would shape and define the boundaries of Christian West. Like the Greeks, the Church had no real use of it, in fact unlike the Greek before them, they feared it even more, as it threatened the very Idea of Divine creation and hinted about the irrational at the very heart of Godhead. This was unacceptable.

Mathematically ‘0’ (zero) is nothing and everything, point instant and infinity, it was this dual nature that was unacceptable to the Christian Europe. So dangerous was this ‘Idea’ of ‘0’ (zero), that Giordano Bruno would be burnt at the stake as a heretic. Though all this was to change in the age of enlightenment, still, somehow, this ancient prejudice would seep in and become the dominant bias of modernity. We don’t have to look for it in the torn pages of history, rather it is here, right under our roof; In this so called, ‘rigor’ of our professor through which the irrationals are filtered out.

And behind this demand for pure value independent rigor I contend, lies an ancient bias, a prejudice, a fanatic and frantic attempt to control, normalize, thematise, synchronize all things different and antithetic -to its own typical and technical way of thinking.”

“Coming back to Yama and Yami” The stranger continues, “He ‘one’s many‘, lords ratio and time, she zeros and nothings, plays with counterfactuals and irrationals, he regulates and orders, where as she hides within her womb, the power to shatter ‘ratio‘, to turn it mad and to vaporize time into a point eternity. She wholes, nonlocals, He separates, locals, she grants healing and he disease, he is death and dies, she deathless and lives forever, but it is through them, these binary twins, that the world weaves its fabric. And thus, in spite of Yama’s contentions, their fates arrive entwined and their paths remain forever entangled.

Two task they bear, two paths they sketch, bheda and abheda, thus their gaze guide all things living.”

“Poetic virtuoso will get you no where.” Smiled the professor clearly unable to mask his irritation. “Anyway, what has all this rubbish gobbledygook got to do with my book.”

“Well! Coming back to your book, you are right to make a note of the fact that the Dasarajna hymns are not nation founding hymns which were written to inform us about the violent separation of India from the Persians, nor are the miraculous thinning of the waters of Parusni allowing the men of Sudas to retreat, and drowning the Dasarajna army when they attempt to chase them, destroying almost all in the process. What I do find contentious is where you note on the margins that this Hymn could be an imitation of the Biblical myth where God parts the river thus allowing the Jews to escape the Pharos wrath while drowning his men as they dare to chase them through the river. Further when interpreting hymn 7.18.19 and 7.33.3 you write that the commander in chief of the Ten tribes by the name ‘Bheda’ was trapped and slaughtered by Vasishtha as he met him half way through the river Yamuna. Seeing him defeated, there was a scramble along the enemy lines which lead to a change of allegiance and loyalty, all to Sudas’s advantage. And as his army swelled by the sudden turn of allegiances, the outsiders or foreigners were picked, marked and massacred in ten and thousands.”

“Yes! But isn’t that what the Dasarajna Hymn says? ”

“In a way these events can be interpreted as you have done, but then there are things that clearly make no sense. For example why would the adversary try to take control of the river by building canals and try to fork it in a desperate attempt to tame and harness her power. How could they do all this right in the middle when they were on Sudas’s heels only to find themselves trapped in the deadly powers of Parusni. Could this water or river connote something else? Waters after all in Vedic times always meant knowledge, know how, Thus their struggle with her could very well be a world picture struggling to come to terms with its own internal conundrums. After all, they did attempt to create a new Universe in place of the old.
It is also possible that certain commonsensical facts have been overlooked by you and your otherwise rigorous scholarship. Facts which are well known to every Indian household. To put it in other words, It is well known that Vasishtha’s insights about the world and things were rooted in abheda or in the philosophy of Identity and non-difference, whereas, that of Vishwamitra in bheda, that is difference or duality. Yamuna as you may know represents the manifest form of Yami, it is through her that she gets signified and it is through her physical characteristics that she is often alluded by the Vedic poets as the dark and unfathomable, and it is here in hymn 7.18.19 and 7.33.3 that bheda, difference or duality were routed. Going by the dynamics of the hymn, and if we were to join two plus two, then one could safely deduce from these hymns that these hymns speak not just about some actual event but also about a spiritual, a philosophical, a technological victory. The poets conceal the spiritual, the philosophical within the historical, and this sir completely turns the rigour of your scholarship upside down and shows persuasively that all your rigour can ever attain is a literal rendering, which is indeed the poverty of your whole thought. Though the Hymn 10.5.2 clearly speaks that: ‘The sages guard the seat of Holy Order, and keep the highest names concealed within them.’ This essentially means that you, with your rigorous and prejudice free methods are clearly unable to fathom the concealed truth (as the poet claims in 10.5.2) and so miserably fail to see that Yami in one sense also means to un-conceal, to open-up, to disclose, to lay bare, and by Yami’s intervention and favour it is declared in hymn 7.18.19 and 7.33.3 was bheda’s riches undone.

It is also well known that there are two clear and distinct ways men have come to order their world of perception both here and yonder. They are often spoken as the way of the manes and that of the gods. Those who follow the insights and deeds opened up by Yama are said to gain wealth and prosperity here in this world and his heaven yonder, and those who follow the pathless and goalless openings of Yami, attain immortality straightaway.
To conclude: Your whole book sir is about a new outlook, an outlook free from all sort of traditional, religious, national, and cultural biases as well as their petty tribal prejudices. It declares that history has come to an end. But that realm belongs to the way opened up by her and not what is claimed by you ‘the Greek being’. If you would read Hymn 10.154 as I have read, you too would see what I have seen and glimpse in her as I have her true inner greatness. You sir by rejecting the un-concealing have in the process also lost the faculty necessary to experience her infinite heart, as well as her deep and unfathomable compassion for all and everyone. And having seen her you would have seen the insights concealed in the works of Gandhi.”

“Gandhi Haan!” the professor rattled, “that’s what it is all about haan. 6000 years has failed to put her sense in your head. Don’t you see. It is ‘I’” the professors voice increased, “I represent the very voice of History.”

“You may very well be the voice of history” replied the stranger, “But across these six millenniums, you like Yama have remained stuck in your own ritualistic grammar driven narrow messianic conundrums. Isn’t it Yama who extols like a fearful zealot. A fanatic who demands to be taken seriously simply upon the virtue of his own word. Look at the world, look at what has finally become of her.

“You!” The professors legs trembled with rage, “You… you Vasishtha”, his voice choked and the next thing we see is the professor struggling on the ground. There was chaos everywhere. People ran to the stage, but the professor was dead. They rush him to Breachcandy where he is declared brought dead. They confirmed later that he died of cardiac arrest. As for the stranger, he just disappeared, no one knows where.

**********

What baffles me even to this day are the very last words spoken by our dear Professors Dieter M. Borgmaan ‘6000 years has failed to put her sense in you.’ he had roared. His very last mortal words were “You… you Vasishtha”. I am still baffled at what passed between the two on that fatal hour. On that day without doubt, something else spoke through him or rather them, something invisible and profoundly deep, something ghost like. I can vouch upon my life that on that day, and in the confusion of that terrible hour, these two were not two men but two spirits, two logos, two reasons, two modes of thinking, two ways of being, like two birds who live and feed on the same tree, having the same ancestry. They had like their binary twin showed up here after six thousand years, these Vasishthas and Vishwamitras, they were here, and they fought as they have always done over a million years.

The End

© RajivMudgal., all rights reserved.