Truth vs. Fact

In India, we sometimes discuss, is this what we learn in school books is India's real history? The reason behind this doubt lies in the observed biases in history. This manipulation of  Medieval period history is much evident being closer to modern time. The history books consistently hide the misdeeds of invaders and their heirs in India and coronate them with all virtues. We learn about every generation of Mughal rulers, how they got power, and how they lost it -- without telling what they did to the people to get the power and even after getting the power. Not only that, the historical perspective of those who tried to preserve the Indian values is masked. The victories of Indian warriors against them are never highlighted. 

The school books present little about the Hindu and Buddist rulers, saints, philosophers, and scientists driving the knowledge-driven society before invaders spoilt it overall. There is a great lesson to learn there that knowledge and strength are not mutually exclusive. Tolerance is not unlimited; otherwise, it is self-destructive if not cowardice. 

In fact, whatever little we learn about these great people from India are mostly presented as a story in subjects like Hindi and English. The reason told is that there is not enough evidence to verify the facts. Facts about what? That exact year something happened, or how many people were present or the original manuscript is not there. Really! Isn't historical facts in many cases have been corrected when new evidence is obtained. 

To me, just like any other subject, history has a great purpose of serving mankind by preventing people from making the same mistake they did in the past. I don't mean that history should become a moral science book. But, it is more about the truth and not about fact. History should be presented as truth from which people can learn. The fact-checking on year, number of people, and the exact location can be done later, but the truth should not be hidden for that purpose. If at any point if a fact appears, it should be appended to the historical context. 

Door open, ears closed!

After a few weeks of office sharing with a friend of mine, who also joined with me, I was moved to the office of a "more experienced" colleague. Being in the same function, it was told that this will allow better interaction and performance. As a new joiner, all you got is trust in others and watchful eyes to learn and adapt quickly. In the previous office, we used to keep the door closed since that allowed us to focus without distractions from outside, and when we discuss something, others are not impacted as well. Quite honestly, being new, we talked and shared information and ideas all the time. So, others had more danger of getting distracting from us than we had from others. After all, we were new in the system. But in this new office, I was welcomed with a note, "I follow open door policy. This allows others to feel comfortable reaching out to me". I was not used to it, so I was struggling to keep my attention on work, but anyway, I must trust, and so did I.

While I struggled, I saw my colleague working without any impact from the noisy corridor. I thought it is because of being more used to it. My belief turned to a shock after a few weeks when I tried to say something, and with a focus like a yogi, my colleague could not hear that I asked something. Sitting in front, I waved big, and the colleague pulled thus far, not so visible earplugs behind the hairs. My trust in open-door policy shattered in pieces. What kind of open-door vision is that you cannot hear your own office colleague. Years passed since then. While the door remained open for others, the ears never opened for the next desk colleagues. When they opened, they opened for self-need. I reciprocated!

Many houses - One home

Ever since I left my home in Mau in 1998 after class 10th, I have lived in many places. Obviously, this led to live in many big and small houses so far. Some were consciously temporary like college hostels, while some were big enough as if I am going to live there life long. Honestly, every time I move to a house I get a feeling that this is going to last movement and now I am going to live here without a due date. Despite this intense feeling, two things happen all the time. First, every time life takes a turn and I get to move to a new place, to a new house eventually. With the same intense belief, we bought a house in Turnhout and it seems that life is ready with another turn and I am once again going to move out of this own created burden of belief. Anyway, with all these changes, there is a second thing which does not change. The home in my dream. Having lived so many cities across the world, lived in many more houses, still in my dreams, I find myself in my home in Mau. The stage of all good and bad things of the dream always happens to be in my home in Mau. I wonder does the same happen to others? What happens in the dream of people who has no home when a child? And, what happens to those whose childhood life is like my life after leaving home -- changing house very frequently?