The History of Mankind is not the story of the entire human race. Rather, it is the tale of a few men – men with fire in their eyes and courage in their hearts, men who stood for some principles, lived for them and died for them. It is the story of Gandhi, of Hitler and of Socrates. Better still, it is the story of triumph of ideals over the commonplace, of determination and dedication over haplessness.
Seems improbable, isn’t it? Well let’s conduct a small experiment. How many of us remember our great-grandfather’s name? Or, to put it in another way, how many of us are sure our great – grandchildren will ever hear of us? On the other hand, how many of us feel that Gandhi will ever be forgotten?
Modern day society has a knack of ‘ensuring compliance’ with its changing ideals. Starting from peer pressure to mud slinging and utmost efforts to crush soaring spirits, its instruments are many. It is in this context that the glory of an idealist is enhanced. For the grass that bends in the direction of the wind is trampled upon while the mighty tree that stands tall despite the gales is looked up to.
In the name of adjustment, of being practical, we find that we change our ideals so very often. Sometimes it’s a crisis and some other time, a chance of some material gain. Whatever be the reason, we compromise ever so often. As a result, what do we find? As Ayn Rand puts it in her book “Fountainhead” in reference to the character Roark, “Of all of us, only he will be immortal – immortal not in the sense of deathlessness but rather because he lives for a single ideal. When he is remembered, he’ll be remembered for it. But we, who change our thinking every single moment, we who are never constant even in life, what will we represent after death?”
So those of you out there who pride on being practical, think thou that “Here is one against us”? But you couldn’t be further away from truth. I am one of you, a proud drop in the ocean of mediocrity, another sickening crab among the many in the basket. Fools they are, those who do not change, for haven’t we been taught that change is the only constant thing in life? So what if they are called ‘great noble men’, they are still fools if they cannot sell but a chip of their soul for wealth in real sense, who prefer white to the dazzling array of colours that our world offers (What is white for if not to be used as a base of the myriad colours?)
So what if they are remembered for ever, we are comfortable while we are. We can look them in their eyes, our noses turned up. With scornful mirth, we laugh at their abject poverty, their lack of commonsense to grab opportunities with both their hands. So what if they lord about in their fancy principles, we can still crush them with our money and equalize the scores. And we are within our rights to do it, after all doesn’t every street dog bark at the mighty elephant?
Yet, at the end of the day, it is who you are and not what you have that matters. And it is here that they checkmate us. When, on the weighing scales, stripped of everything we cherish, we find that our net worth is next to nothing, and they, out of friendliness, offer a shoulder to lean on, only then do we realize the value of ideals. Immortality has many ways unto itself. Every page in History has a name inscribed in bold, and each name evokes a response from the students of History. Behind each name is an ideal diligently followed, a principle never compromised. And behind each response lie the intent and the outcome of the uncompromised principle. If Hitler’s fervent belief in ‘Aryan Superiority’ and its consequences draw an involuntary gasp and shudder, Gandhiji’s ‘Non-Violent Movement’ raises the consciousness of individuals and nations. So what is it that makes one ideal admirable and another despicable?
An ideal should be such that it concurs with the dictates of the conscience. Not only the ideal, but also the means of achieving it should follow the lead provided by the conscience. After all, there comes a time when we need to face the “man in the mirror” and we would need to face him with confidence, understanding, honesty and with no regret. It is this ability to face the “man in the mirror” that will assure us our own place in the Book of Time. History will remember us, not only as great and well-known, but also as good and well-loved. This is all the difference between Hitler and Gandhi, Bose and Dyer, Socrates and his accusers.
I started off by saying “The History of mankind is not the story of the entire human race”. Let me correct myself. The History of Mankind is the story of the entire human race – for only he can be called a man who has the courage to stand by his ideal, an ideal that not only raises his stature in the eyes of his fellowmen, but more importantly, enhances it in his own. For only about them can it truly be said:
Nasti Thesham Yeshah Kaye Jara Maranajam Bhayam.
Seems improbable, isn’t it? Well let’s conduct a small experiment. How many of us remember our great-grandfather’s name? Or, to put it in another way, how many of us are sure our great – grandchildren will ever hear of us? On the other hand, how many of us feel that Gandhi will ever be forgotten?
Modern day society has a knack of ‘ensuring compliance’ with its changing ideals. Starting from peer pressure to mud slinging and utmost efforts to crush soaring spirits, its instruments are many. It is in this context that the glory of an idealist is enhanced. For the grass that bends in the direction of the wind is trampled upon while the mighty tree that stands tall despite the gales is looked up to.
In the name of adjustment, of being practical, we find that we change our ideals so very often. Sometimes it’s a crisis and some other time, a chance of some material gain. Whatever be the reason, we compromise ever so often. As a result, what do we find? As Ayn Rand puts it in her book “Fountainhead” in reference to the character Roark, “Of all of us, only he will be immortal – immortal not in the sense of deathlessness but rather because he lives for a single ideal. When he is remembered, he’ll be remembered for it. But we, who change our thinking every single moment, we who are never constant even in life, what will we represent after death?”
So those of you out there who pride on being practical, think thou that “Here is one against us”? But you couldn’t be further away from truth. I am one of you, a proud drop in the ocean of mediocrity, another sickening crab among the many in the basket. Fools they are, those who do not change, for haven’t we been taught that change is the only constant thing in life? So what if they are called ‘great noble men’, they are still fools if they cannot sell but a chip of their soul for wealth in real sense, who prefer white to the dazzling array of colours that our world offers (What is white for if not to be used as a base of the myriad colours?)
So what if they are remembered for ever, we are comfortable while we are. We can look them in their eyes, our noses turned up. With scornful mirth, we laugh at their abject poverty, their lack of commonsense to grab opportunities with both their hands. So what if they lord about in their fancy principles, we can still crush them with our money and equalize the scores. And we are within our rights to do it, after all doesn’t every street dog bark at the mighty elephant?
Yet, at the end of the day, it is who you are and not what you have that matters. And it is here that they checkmate us. When, on the weighing scales, stripped of everything we cherish, we find that our net worth is next to nothing, and they, out of friendliness, offer a shoulder to lean on, only then do we realize the value of ideals. Immortality has many ways unto itself. Every page in History has a name inscribed in bold, and each name evokes a response from the students of History. Behind each name is an ideal diligently followed, a principle never compromised. And behind each response lie the intent and the outcome of the uncompromised principle. If Hitler’s fervent belief in ‘Aryan Superiority’ and its consequences draw an involuntary gasp and shudder, Gandhiji’s ‘Non-Violent Movement’ raises the consciousness of individuals and nations. So what is it that makes one ideal admirable and another despicable?
An ideal should be such that it concurs with the dictates of the conscience. Not only the ideal, but also the means of achieving it should follow the lead provided by the conscience. After all, there comes a time when we need to face the “man in the mirror” and we would need to face him with confidence, understanding, honesty and with no regret. It is this ability to face the “man in the mirror” that will assure us our own place in the Book of Time. History will remember us, not only as great and well-known, but also as good and well-loved. This is all the difference between Hitler and Gandhi, Bose and Dyer, Socrates and his accusers.
I started off by saying “The History of mankind is not the story of the entire human race”. Let me correct myself. The History of Mankind is the story of the entire human race – for only he can be called a man who has the courage to stand by his ideal, an ideal that not only raises his stature in the eyes of his fellowmen, but more importantly, enhances it in his own. For only about them can it truly be said:
Nasti Thesham Yeshah Kaye Jara Maranajam Bhayam.
No comments:
Post a Comment