People, On this forum one regularly comes across posts -- bewildering analysis on a range of topics, including complex social ills. These are written in the manner of the aesthete, to mean one having a sense of well digested modernity -- memory, convictions and materialism. And of course the succulent olive of egalitarianism to prevent an otherwise lugubrious martini; to go with the sorpotel of modernity. A singular thread runs through them, namely the aversion to past mores and treatments conducted though beliefs as manifested via exegesis of religious texts, bittersweet memories of dalliances and interactions, including caste persuasions and pretensions, and religion as practiced over time.
I say aesthete, since very often it is such an individual who presumes that one is above others in ones station in life. The belief is that one has encountered ones share of life, having had deep encounters, blushes and brushes against the effervescently pulchritudinous, while being regarded as remarkable for ones rectitude. Furthermore these presenters have the fortitude to take on hard issues, in a verite format, but consistently shy away from underpinning their attempts at veracity with reasonable references, that support views and flesh out hurts. This is not quite a scholarly forum, and I am not a scholar; but to delve into analytical renderings of ills, which range from Hinduism, to all manners of articulation, and have it be regarded as opinion -- as such exempt from deeper or rather elaborate though -- often needed, is indeed diluting the collective intelligence of the forum. When issues such as development, marriages, the issues that widows have been subjected to (other than to immediately imply sati, which there is no reason for me to just talk about) in all communities, foster children, domestic abuse -- almost non existent on this forum (trigger happy people, note the word -- almost). Everyone on this forum, has at some point posted a solid fact now and then, some consistently and others not so, some of us have erred and mended our ways, some persist on. The path we are on requires us to be be more than modestly understanding of such facts. It is not enough to superficially approach beliefs and religions other than ones own. Comparisons, that are merely tit for tat are best left behind to our college days, and the gallis, mohallas, vaddos, and bastis of our minds. If one has watched Lejim/lezim one will see in the deadly mimicry of the thrust, parry, the lunges; feints and weaves of earlier swordsmanship. Likewise, our thoughts. The deeper the hurts, no matter how sophisticated ones education and erudition; the higher the propensity to repeatedly crash on the rocks of barren intellectual shores. venantius j pinto
