Wednesday, 29 June 2016

क्षमा ... Forgiveness

 Subject: Forgiveness    .........   Date: Dec 20, 2015 7:10 AM
 Ravi Mago:
        मानवीय गुणों में एक प्रमुख गुण है "क्षमा" और क्षमा जिस भी मनुष्य के अन्दर है वो किसी वीर से कम नही है। तभी तो कहा गया है कि- " क्षमा वीरस्य भूषणं और क्षमा वाणीस्य भूषणं " क्षमा साहसी लोगों का आभूषण है और क्षमा वाणी का भी आभूषण है। यद्यपि किसी को दंडित करना या डाँटना आपके वाहुबल को दर्शाता है।
         मगर शास्त्र का वचन है कि बलवान वो नहीं जो किसी को दण्ड देने की सामर्थ्य रखता हो अपितु बलवान वो है जो किसी को क्षमा करने की सामर्थ्य रखता हो। अगर आप किसी को क्षमा करने का साहस रखते हैं तो सच मानिये कि आप एक शक्तिशाली सम्पदा के धनी हैं और इसी कारण आप सबके प्रिय बनते हो।
        आजकल परिवारों में अशांति और क्लेश का एक प्रमुख कारण यह भी है कि हमारे जीवन से और जुवान से क्षमा नाम का गुण लगभग गायब सा हो गया है। दूसरों को क्षमा करने की आदत डाल लो जीवन की कुछ समस्याओं से बच जाओगे। निश्चित ही अगर आप जीवन में क्षमा करना सीख जाते हैं तो आपके कई झंझटों का स्वत:निदान हो जाता है।
Puran Sharma
Shama magma क्षमा मागना is as important as Shama Karna क्षमा करना.

Anand Ghare (Self)
The key word is क्षमा करने का सामर्थ्य, the strength to forgive, mental as well as physical, military, political etc. We see very often that people who can't do anything pose as 'forgivers' and then become an object of ridicule.
As PD has said asking for क्षमा is very important, but it should also accompany with genuine regret for the misdeed. The present case of juvenile offender is being seen from that angle.
Lastly the whole legal system is based on punishment for crime. Only the highest state authority is permitted to forgive because they are powerful. Other functionaries like police or judge have to strictly work under law, at least in theory. However, it seen in movies (also in real life) that so called large hearted Good (or selfish and bad) people in the system allow the culprit to go scot free and then they continue to commit more crimes. In such cases क्षमा is misused.
Finally, in our personal life forgive an forget attitude clears a lot of backlog of hateful negative feelings and you feel better.
Puran Sharma
I feel principle of 'Seek' and 'Give' forgiveness may be more useful in mending 'Relationship' which sometimes break due to misunderstandings or high handed Ness. Vulnerable relationships may be Husband-wife, Father-Son, Friendship, Boss-Subordinate etc. Societal Crimes, pilitical oppression or military aggression may have to be dealt by the rules made by Society where mercy or forgiveness may not help because of plurality in affected persons.
Anand Ghare
 Seeking forgiveness means overcoming your ego and granting it is magnanimity, both very important for building relationships.
I was mainly commenting on Ravi's mail that talks about वीर, सामर्थ्य, दंड etc. we should not bring these in personal relationships.
Bhanwarlal Sharma
kshama badan ko chahiye, chotan ko utpat, क्षमा बडन को चाहिये छोटन को उत्पात ।
is a village saying.sir i fully agree with your views.
Mohan Rao
Thanks for bringing up this issue of क्षमा (forgiveness) to our focus.
One important element is penance or self forgiveness which may also involve the idea of self-disciplining. Forgiving oneself by some penance or self-action leads to self-absolution. Gandhiji showed the world how this can be done by fasting, prayer and community service etc. It is hardly taught in our social system and the whole penal system depends on punishment by an authority (judicial system) to the exclusion of everything else and the ‘idea of doing time’ has pervaded the society and the pressure of ensuring that the one who committed crime gets fair time in a jail has become the norm. The result is an expensive penal code, systems for incarceration and the ensuing cost on the society. The idea of penance is practiced to some extent in some religions as in Orthodox Christianity where the one who committed crime can take care of his own atonement and can get absolved by a sacramental act of confession to a priest. The act of apologizing or saying sorry without honest regretfulness to wrongdoing in one’s own heart does not meet the need for forgiveness in the mind of the victim although it has become a societal  need for a quick reparation and some sense of justice. In my view this issue is so important to bring up in our school systems and see if the idea of atonement is any more practical than what it is now (a mannerism rather than penance). To err is human, to forgive divine simply lets the one who committed the aggression perhaps go free and recommit the crime.

I was walking the Chowpatty beach in Mumbai years ago where I saw a street artist drawing on the pavement his own picture seeking alms from a well-dressed (suit and tie and a briefcase in fact) person walking by without even noticing the artist (face turned the other way). I stopped to appreciate his art when the artist stopped as well and without my prompting said pointing to his picture: “These Sahibs do not understand what people like you and me go through in life”. I could sense the burden of social injustice that he was carrying by his looks and the meagre but only way he knew in trying perhaps to feed his family. I was in my casuals (jeans and an umbrella, unkempt and looking slovenly and homeless) and seemingly was perhaps literally not his object in any way. I however searched my pockets and gave him a few coins before I understandingly nodded to his comment and walked off. I was thinking about the encounter and realized that I did the right thing. Had I gone away without emptying my pockets of the coins, his comments would have bothered me in my sleep that night and would have a left a stigma of being a Sahib of his definition for a while. A simple act of penance for a simple problem I saw of my also being someone in disguise who perhaps was his object of injustice. Was he the victim or did he simply play his trickery on me for a few coins? I do not know. What I did left both of us satisfied for that moment anyway.

Comment from Ghare on Shri Mohanarao's mail:

He has brought up a very different and often neglected aspect of forgiveness, forgiving self.
We hear a common dialog in many Hindi films or serials " ..... वरना मै खुद को कभी माफ नही कर सकूँगी।"
 We murmur, "If not, then what are you going to do to yourself?' and laugh it off. However, this blaming oneself for any wrong thing can make the person very sad and dejected and he may even loose his confidence. So it is important to analyse the root cause of the seemingly wrong decision or action, try to rectify and then forgive oneself in order to move forward.

Ashok Malhotra
Just a quote that came to mind going through this chain:
  "It's one thing to have ideals, and quite another to live by them".

Added on 31/07/2016

Comment from A.Sanatkumar  (June 30, 2016):
May I present a counter-view please? To forgive another's faults and misdeeds perhaps is not always a good policy, however romantic such an act of "forgiving" may sound. "Punishment fit the crime" may be a good, via media dictum. In the history of our country that I learnt in my school days, it was taught, as I now recollect, that valorous king Prithviraj Chauhan, after defeating invading Muhammad Ghori in battle, and failing to learn from the historical incidents of the massacre and plunder of Somnathpur temple by Mahmud Ghazni about a hundred years earlier, mistakenly thought he was being magnanimous and क्षमा-fied and let the invader Ghori go, only to be killed by Ghori in a घोर manner during his subsequent invasion.


Reply (from myself):
Thanks, Sanatkumar for the comment and regret delay in reply.
A Subhashit is, हस्तस्य भूषणम् दानम्, सत्यम् कण्ठस्य भूषणम् | श्रोत्रस्य भूषणम् शास्त्रम् , भूषणै: किम् प्रयोजनम्? ||
It means "Charity is the ornament for hands. Truth is the ornament for speech. Hearing the scriptures is the ornament for ears. Where is the need for other ornaments?"
Similarly "क्षमा वीरस्य भूषणं " means forgiveness is an ornament for the brave. As nobody needs to wear ornaments all the time, it is not necessary for the brave to keep forgiving everybody. The phrase actually hints that forgiveness by a weak person who cannot punish is meaningless. Only one who is powerful can claim he has forgiven somebody for his offence or mistake.  The example of Mohammad Ghori and Prithviraj Chouhan is often quoted as if the very concept of forgiveness is wrong. In my opinion that perception is not right.

In retrospect it appears forgiving Mohammad Ghori by Prithviraj Chouhan was a grave blunder on his part, because it not only resulted in his downfall but changed the entire course of Indian history.  However, perhaps it was either underestimation of the hidden strength of the enemy or overconfidence about his own invincibility on the part of Prithviraj Chouhan that would have prompted him to forgive Mohammad Ghori and let him go at that point of time. It may not be just showing his valour or magnanimity or  following "क्षमा वीरस्य भूषणं ". Neither underestimation nor overconfidence was appropriate for a wise ruler. I do not think a hundred year old history would have been known to him or would have been fresh in his mind in those days.

We also find that there used to be frequent wars between different neighboring kingdoms in the history and the winner used to take the loot or impose some fine under a pact but spare the loser's life. Mohammad Ghori did not do that. The treachery by Jaychand Rathod also played important role in the sordid episode. It may be called a multiple failure. However, we need not be judgmental without knowing actual full details, more than what we read in our History textbooks in school.

There may be hundreds of examples in history, in which the erstwhile warring countries and their rulers patched up their soured relations, buried the hatchet and became allies, even built close relations. It is possible only by adopting a forgive and forget policy.
Anand Ghare

Sunday, 12 June 2016

Too cheap to meter ..... Too costly too!

We have heard a phrase "Too cheap to meter" many times. It was wrongly attributed to Nuclear power by its enthusiastic supporters in the beginning and is often being used by its opponents to deride it. Now the truth has come out that such a statement was never made by anybody for the nuclear power in particular.

A large number of nuclear power stations were set up in USA and European countries in the initial couple of decades with the promise of cheap power, then the programme tapered off due to many reasons, cost competitiveness of fossil fuel also among them. Now renewable sources like Wind power and Solar power are preferred choices, though they are still too costly.

We have another paradoxical situation in rural India. The electrical power is given to pumping sets on wells dug in the fields spread over vast areas and to the hamlets or farmhouses situated far away from towns. It is not economical for the staff to regularly visit each place for reading meters. There are other reasons preventing them to do so. In addition the power to farming sector is highly subsidized due to political reasons. Electricity bills are sometimes waived. Then there are unauthorized connections. As a result of these factors a lot of power is not accounted for. 'Too cheap' for the users! However, it is cross subsidized at the cost of regular consumers and becomes 'Too costly' for them. Still it is not as costly as not to have it at all. So another catchy slogan "No power is costlier than No-power." 
"Too cheap to meter"
We​​ ​might ​have heard this phrase often, and may have even come across some explanations about it and its origins.
Nevertheless I found this article by US NRC​,​ interesting and informative​.​​​
Too Cheap to Meter”: A History of the Phrase​, June 3, 2016 by Thomas Wellock​, Historian
​[ ]​

Some other links on this topic are:
In the late 1950s, similar feverish calculations were made by Dr Bhabha to establish that nuclear power could be way cheaper than coal (at that time carbon print was still not on print).
During his speech at the inauguration of a reactor, Pt. Nehru made some mild references to such calculations, 'calculating and recalculating to make nuclear power cheap', as I recall,  after which Dr Bhabha changed to 'No power is costlier than no power'
In gross contrast, another PM, Morarji Desai, embarrassed everybody at his guest speech at the Training School graduation function, by asking ' what has nuclear power done to the farmers', making, I am told, some promising graduates to leave for other prospects!
There was euphoria in1960s, with DAE at the back, about abundance of energy from sea water by Fusion Process!

Rajasthan govt had given huge amount of land for establishing RAPP and DAE had perhaps promised electricity too cheap to meter. When we wanted to collect our dues from RSEB the Chairman RSEB reminded us about it. I am not sure whether we were ever able to collect our full dues for electricity supplied .I had heard it personally it and am stating from my memory which may have deteriorated over a long period of time.
Just common sense would say Fusion should always prevail over Fission. Fusion of thoughts leads to love and progress. Fission leads to all negative tendencies. So, the emphasis should have been always on Fusion !
The first impressions about both animate as well inanimate objects are often misleading, the experience teaches us so.
     So is the case with the Atomic Power, starting from the point of " too cheap to ...." to "impossible to meet the economically viable range".
   I came across a similar case while setting up the Uran ONGC project. It was well known that there is acute shortage of soft water in this region, so the plant was initially designed with sea water cooling system, considered available at zero cost at the coast. Many NPPs are also designed with sea water cooling systems. But when basic designs n costing were done, using suitable exotic  materials, jetties for the intake n discharge  to the sea, it was difficult to reconcile the cost escalations n new sources of soft water were developed.
 Back to square one
I had never thought the Infamous American speech- ‘ Too Cheap to Meter' originally made in 1954 by the then Chairman USAEC Dr. Lewis Strauss to American Scientific Writers Association in New York, was used to justify RAPP-1 installation?

There was no nuclear power plant yet built in USA or in the world in 1954. It is quite likely therefore, the speech was in context to the Fusion technology, under active research in USA, but being classified in nature, L Strauss had not mentioned fusion either. But certainly, it was not fission.

It shows one should be clever or clear in mind, when arguing on the basis of hearsay for or against a conceptual project.

The actual statements as reported on the above mentioned links are as follows: These appear general optimistic predictions. nothing more!

"Our children will enjoy in their homes electrical energy too cheap to meter," he declared.   ...    "It is not too much to expect that our children will know of great periodic regional famines in the world only as matters of history, will travel effortlessly over the seas and under them and through the air with a minimum of danger and at great speeds, and will experience a lifespan far longer than ours, as disease yields and man comes to understand what causes him to age."
  Lewis L. Strauss
  Speech to the National Association of Science Writers, New York City, September 16th, 1954
  [New York Times, September 17, 1954]
Lewis L. Strauss, chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, recently said:
"It is not too much to expect that our children will enjoy in their homes electrical energy too cheap to meter; will know of great periodic regional famines in the world only as matters of history; will travel effortlessly over the seas and under them and through the air with a minimum of danger and at great speeds, and will experience a lifespan far longer than ours, as disease yields and man comes to understand what causes him to age. This is the forecast of an age of peace."
  [New York Times, August 7, 1955]

On the Function
 The civil engineers had many mock trials on the direction and structure of the shamiana, expecting heavy wind forces, in the open ground.. Still , on that eventful day, when Pt.Nehru was at his eloquent best, on the CIRUS DOME being a symbol of our new temple, the shamiana tore to pieces with the wind and the great and much embarrassed Dr.Bhabha on the stage jumped from his seat and tried to hold the flying pieces together!
We used to joke as to how many heads rolled the next day!
Another proof that common sense is not so common & is a misnomer.
   I can relate my own similar experience when PM Indira Gandhi visited RAPP-1 in 1970 or 71, I expressly informed our site photographer to be present. But the guy did not turn up that very day & at this remote place no replacement was possible. I had no option but to hang the camera around my neck n go around with the VIPs as a photographer. I can't forget that experience

Saturday, 11 June 2016

Motive Matters ... to Agree Culture

This Chain started with a considered view that Motive behind building a temple or writing a Mahakavya (epic) matters a lot and has effect on its future course.  Then it went from Motive to Karma to Prayojan ending with Agreeculture via Cash or Trash 

K.Natarajan wrote:

Epics and temples are the grassroots of our civilization, rather the very way of living!
So unique to us and not found anywhere in the world (except a few neighboring countries with geographical connectivity!)
Temples were built in this great religious country, like the epics of Ramayana and Mahabharata, to perpetuate the god feeling in man. Great rulers considered it as a religious duty to build temples with the tax money collected from the subjects.
The epics were written with a spirit of selfless Bhakthi, to the glory of heroes, considered as avatars of God.
We read a beautiful story of self-effacing Bhakthi of Hanuman and the Bhakthi tinged (imaginative story, of course) with exhibition of great literary gnan of the poet  Valmiki. (posting by Vaghasia Ji and given below)
There is a similar story of Vyasa, poet author of Mahabharata.
It is said that Vyasa did not find the peace of contentment, even after satisfactory completion of the great epic.
Narada appeared before the desolate Vyasa and told him the reason .
Vyasa's emphasis was on the poetic situations of humans, though avatars of God. Now take up writing of gods, as the stories of gods, poetry pushed to the sides, and that is how the Puranas were born.
Idhihasas and Puranas, as embodiment of poetry and piety?!

Two of the greatest temples in Tamilnadu, the land of temples, come to the mind, that of Bragadeeswarar koil (temple), also known as Raja rajeswar koil, at Thanjavur and Meenakshi Amman koil at Madurai.
Both are more than thousand years old.
The former gradually became less visited by devotees and had to be reactivated by projected sanctity on certain auspicious days etc.  Today it is more a tourist spot of great architectural antiquity than a place of religious worship.
The appeal of the later spontaneously grew, earning the name of temple town to Madurai, with millions of people visiting the temple.
The reason is not far to find.
King Rajaraja cholan built the temple as a mark of personal glory, even naming the temple after him.
The Madurai temple was built by Nayakkar kings, to protect the people of the town, even naming the God as the first ruler, without even knowing who built the temple.

Selfless devotion is the automatic way to everlasting merit!

My views without any authority, purely looked as social issues, with no intention to discuss religious faiths.
With warm regards, malice to none!,

Since Wikipedia has become our literature, I am giving the Wikipedia  meaning to piety to save you the trouble!
"In spiritual terminology, piety is a virtue that may include religious devotion, spirituality, or a mixture of both. A common element in most conceptions of piety is humility and religiosity."


Post by R.S.Vaghasiya on Hanuman and Valmiki:

When Valmiki completed his Ramayana, Narada wasn't impressed.
 'It is good, but Hanuman's is better', he said.

 'That monkey has written the Ramayana too!'
 Valmiki didn't like this at all, and wondered whose Ramayana was better.
 So he set out to find Hanuman.

 In Kadali-vana, grove of plantains, he found Ramayana inscribed on seven broad leaves of a banana tree.

 He read it and found it to be perfect. The most exquisite choice of grammar, vocabulary & melody.  He couldn't help himself. He started to cry.

 'Is it so bad?' asked Hanuman
 'No, it is so good', said Valmiki

 'Then why are you crying?' asked Hanuman
 'Because after reading your Ramayana no one will read my Ramayana,' replied Valmiki

 Hearing this Hanuman simply tore up the seven banana leaves stating " Now no one will ever read Hanuman's Ramayana.'"

 Hanuman said, 'You need your Ramayana more than I need mine. You wrote your Ramayana so that the world remembers Valmiki; I wrote my Ramayana so that I remember Ram.'

 At that moment he realized how he had been consumed by the desire for validation through his work.
 He had not used the work to liberate himself from the fear of invalidation. He had not appreciated the essence of  Ram's tale to unknot his mind.
 His Ramayana was a product of ambition; but Hanuman's Ramayana was a product of affection.

 That's why Hanuman's Ramayana sounded so much better. Valmiki realized that greater than Ram..... is the idea of Ram!!!!  ( राम से बड़ा राम का नाम ).

 This story tell us that.... There are people like Hanuman who don't want to be famous. They just do their jobs and fulfill their purpose.

 So let us not be like Valmiki, thinking our ''Ramayana" is the best.
 There are many unsung "Hanumans" too!!!
 "Jai Bolo Ramachandra Maharaj Ki Jai"

Written by Gopal Parameshwar
Ashok Malhotra :
   Appreciate your following observations n comments on the topic:
Quote "King Rajaraja cholan built the temple Bragadeeswara as a mark of personal glory, even naming the temple after him.
The Madurai temple was built by nayakkar kings, to protect the people of the town, even naming the God as the first ruler, without even knowing who built the temple.
Selfless devotion is the automatic way to everlasting merit!"
  But I was a bit confused by use of two words 1. Civilization 2. Piety
  Though you took pains to explain Piety as spirituality or devotion (Wiki..), my understanding, based on the depiction by the world famous sculpture  Michelangelo's "Pieta", showing mother Mary holding the dead body of Jesus was more in terms of compassion or mourning, but we learn on.
Re Civilization, I think you meant Culture, which is better connected to religion.
   But perhaps, I may not have properly gauged your motives.

K.Natarajan replied:
Malhotra Ji,
Not 1. Civilization and 2. Piety,  but
Poetry and Piety!
I do not know how poetry was replaced by civilization in your PC! Some type of autonomous PC?!

Poetry refers to the epics and piety refers to the Puranas, and I thought the two rhyme well and later the note on piety!

Motives, again, refer to that of the two kings, one concerned with self and the second with God, not MY motives!
With so much of deterministic material points under discussion, a bit of metaphysical things tent to become stochastic!
Anand Ghare  (Myself):
Can we draw any conclusion from just two examples?
It will be interesting to know who built Thirupathi Thirumalai temples, the most rich and famous of all, Sabarimala temple, Jagannathpuri temple etc. Mahalakshmi temple at Kolhapur and Triambakeshwara temple near Nasik are also some centuries old and beautiful temples fully built with carved stones. They are almost as much crowded by the devotees as Rajaraja and Meenakshee temples, if not more. Actually my personal impression (perhaps wrong) when I visited these latter temples was that they are more of tourist attractions. Vitthala temple at Pandharpur may not be grand but attracts millions of devotees. In spite of being a Maharashtrian and having visited all these temples I never came to know who built them.

Perhaps I am strengthening Shri Natarajan's theory. Piety might have more lasting effect than generosity of the kings from their state treasury. Motive matters. But did Rajaraja have a motive of becoming immortal as the builder of  Brihadeeshwara Temple? On the other side did all the temples built by devoted Bhaktas last long? Mahabalipuram temples may be oldest of them all and have withstood the ravages of sea waves including tsunami, but hardly anybody goes there with the motive of worshiping the deity!

A bit confusing or may be of random nature!
Dear Ghare ji, MohanRao ji, friends,
Time was when I repeatedly used to cajole members to write on anything, apart from our 'mundane' matters of concern..
Now-a-days, there is an INFORMATION EXPLOSION. The rapidity of heavy topics is bunumbing  and , maybe, we do not read well.
Take a quote from your mail
"They are almost as much crowded by the devotees as Rajaraja and Meenakshee temples, if not more. Actually my personal impression (perhaps wrong) when I visited these latter temples was that they are more of tourist attractions.", whereas the point of my mail was that devotees throng Madurai temple, but Thanjavure temple has become more of archeological interest tourist spot, to demonstrate 'motive matters'.

You are right about mahabalipuram and the other famous temples, the former built by the famous Pallava King, Narasimha pallavar, purely of his love of art and more for self glory, the other temples having only godliness as the core, resulting in what you said.
No confusion on Motive matters, even in a grand project of building a temple.
The story posted by Vaghasia ji (attached to my mail), is impressive with a message, and I was only balancing Valmiki with a similar predicament of Vyasa, adding an illustrative example of the two temples with two different motives.

Anyway, if this provides some respite from the heavy cartechnomics, so much the better!

Ashok Malhotra wrote:
      When in any kind of a jam, the last n the only practical option: Repeating the words, "agree culture", n not passing the blame on to the motiveless Jeeves, "the PC".
K.Natarajan :
I agree culture
Dear Ashok ji,
Your reference to Iagree culture starting from bottom moving up for favors triggered a pleasant memory of a  benevolent downward movement of the same., just nostalgia , no bearing on what we are talking about.

A personal joke/ experience of great value in my formative years.

During early 60s, with very acute accommodation problem in Bombay and my  meager salary, a three room flat at DAE Chembur quarters came for allotment, for which I was not eligible. I made a proposal that I
I would share that with another friend, also in acute need, and two would benefit in the lower cadre. My boss would not agree with any such deviations. I pleaded with him to just forward and give me a chance to go, see the super boss, Dr.AS Rao (Ayyagiri Sambasiva Rao). I did get the chance to meet the august personality and talk to him. He just scribbled on the margin of my note, I agree, and signed. I did not realise the pun of his name at that time.
That humane gesture at that critical time went a long way to my comfortable start in Bombay
Ashok Malhotra 
Ayyagiri ( I agree ) Sh Natarajan garu. Thanks n regards.

Shah Nawaz Ahmad :
As our beloved Ysr Prasad saheb used to say ATTITUDE!
Ashok Malhotra 
I was just wondering what's the difference between "कर्मा n motive". Or we are having a repeat of our beloved topic in another Awaatar?
Ganesh Johorey :
Motive is precursor to karma

From: Rustagi
Dear Shri Johoreyji and Ashokji
What I have understood is this - Karma is performed through thought, spoken word, or a bodily act - मनसा, वाचा, कर्मसा.
I would agree with Johoreyji, that Motive or प्रयोजन is a precursor to Karma.
Likewise Attitude or भाव is also a precursor, as pointed out by Shri Ahmad.

You may have heard the following, perhaps from Gandhiji-
Watch your thoughts, as they become words
Watch your words, as they become actions
Watch your actions, as they become habits
Watch your habits, as they become beliefs

This chain can be further extended-
Watch your beliefs, as they become 'pseudo-truths'
Watch the 'pseudo-truths', as they influence your words, and ultimately become your destiny.

Shri Malhotraji, Karma is an unending mystery topic.
Shah Nawaz Ahmad :
The saying you quote Rustagiji is attributed to Prophet Muhammad
And all great men of their times have felt so
Ravi Rustagi:
Thanks Ahmadbhai for the clarification, and it is a precious addition to my knowledge base on prophet Muhammad.
I sincerely believe that all scriptures are replete with gems of knowledge, but humanity for the most part is not aware of that treasure.
A request- Kindly tell me an important and popular short prayer in Islam, similar to the two line Gayatri Mantra of the Hindus. It should be easy to remember, easy to chant, and easy to understand even for me. Not knowing Arabic.

S Dayal :
In God, We Trust ...
              Rest is all ... Cash.

From: रघुवीर रुस्तगी :
अोम् नमो अशोक जी व सुधाकर जी
Thanks for your kind messages.
May I represent Sudhakarji’s remark with a little twist, (replace cash by TRASH) -
In God, We Trust ...
              Rest is all ... TRASH
Let me illustrate this twist from recalling an Akber-Birbal anecdote.
In Akber’s court, a poet came from a distant kingdom, trying to win royal favours by lavish praise of the Emperor. The poet sang the following song in Urdu -
"Akber is great
Akber is invincible
Akber is the richest
Akber is most merciful
Akber is most compassionate
Akber is the only saviour"

The courtesans were in full agreement with the poet, and were clapping all the time. The Emperor was as well showering with costly gifts.

When the courtesans were at the peak of being receptive, the poet changed his tone …….
"Akber is an Avatar of Bhagwan … and there were non-stop clapping and congratulations"

Now the poet fired his last salvo, expecting to be nominated as poet laureate of Akber’s vast kingdom-
"Akber is even more powerful than Supreme Allah or Bhagwan"

But there was a pin drop silence; no one clapped and everyone was looking around who would give the leading clap. On such knotty occasions, some jealous-minded courtesan thought it is an opportunity to shame Birbal, and suggested to the Highness that Birbal should give the right answer - yes or no.

Birbal was now put on the spot. He thought for a while, and said " yes, His Highness is better than Allah the best".
Birbal instantly offered the following explanation-
Sir, Your Majesty can choose to expel anyone out of the territorial boundary of your kingdom, but Allah cannot do so. Hence, Akber the great is more powerful.

The courtesans asked- why Allah cannot do so?
Birbal replied, "because there are no set boundaries of Allha’s territory. If His Highness trusts in Allah, there is nothing else inside or out of God's infinite universe. There are no neighbourly kingdoms etc.”

Friends, Let us remember the Purna mantra
ॐ पूर्णमदः पूर्णमिदं पूर्णात्पुर्णमुदच्यते पूर्णश्य पूर्णमादाय पूर्णमेवावशिष्यते ॥ ॐ शान्तिः शान्तिः शान्तिः ...

So my dear Sudhakarji, my humble request- I am glad you trust in God, then there is no REST, but TRASH.

Ashok Malhotra :
Reading Sh Rastogi's anecdotal reply n the roles of Akbar-Birbal-n the courtisans, I am reminded of Churchill's observation about Indians (!!??), though chilling a bit, but still largely valid:
"If you praise an Indian, he thinks, you are either afraid of him or you have an axe to grind"
   I hope, being an expat for long years rubs off a bit of Indian ness.

From: Rustagi
I ever appreciate and enjoy the freedom and mutual respect in all messages in our Group. Let the British Raj and Churchill remain buried in their coffins. We Indians have shown we can manage better without them. You are true Ashokji they were scared as well as had axes to grind.
Ashok Malhotra
Agreed Rustagiji....Let the British Raj and Churchill remain buried in their coffins but along with Akbar Birbal n the courtesans.
From: Rustagi
Ek Kahe Dooje Ne Maani
( Nanak kahe dono gyani.)