You are a houseplant. 

This should be the starting point of every spiritual conversation, or the first thing one learns in life. Everything else comes after this.

Yes, you are a houseplant. You grow out of a seed, then blossom into youth by feeding on the mother earth, and eventually get dissolved in the same place you came from. Along the way you trade everything that you have (the atoms of your body, the breath, the happiness, the sorrows, and much more) with your surroundings — you take some, you give some. That is all there is to life, isn’t it?

You are a houseplant. Your ancestors grew and spread somewhere in the wild, until they got caught in the trap of civilisation and lost memory of their roots. Then, generations later, inside the comforts of these four walls, you were born. You stayed away from the wilderness and thus acquired certain mannerisms; you are soft and gentle and kind. You also have the time on your hands to contemplate the depths of your own existence.

You are a houseplant — but you are not an ordinary one. You are a houseplant that can walk, talk, drink coffee and read this text, with a thousand other things in your mind and a smile on your face. This means that you are a houseplant with some extraordinary powers. 

But…as they say, with great power comes great responsibility. And so you have to look after yourself.

Where do I start, you might ask?

You start by assuming that you are a houseplant — a complicated one, but still a houseplant. So you start with some water. Then some sunshine. Not too much, just a little. Go slowly and mindfully, starting with your breaths and movements and diet, and then pretty much with everything that you do.

Often our priorities go in the opposite direction. That’s why we suffer. We don’t believe that we are houseplants, but some giant trees in a forest that can endure anything that comes their way. In reality, we can’t. Once upon a time, we used to be that, but not anymore. Now, we are houseplants. So let’s keep it that way and take a deep breath.  

(Art: The Poor Poet by Carl Spitzweg, 1837)

How would you feel if I told you about a man who has got a dangerous eating disorder?

This fellow, while still in bed in the morning, starts eating whatever he finds around his bed. This goes on throughout the day and right to the point when he falls asleep. Often he does not care whether the food is healthy or not. In fact, there is hardly any time to think about that because he is too busy eating one thing or another.

Needless to say, it does affect him. There is a constant feeling of pleasure, which is addictive. Sometimes it makes him angry, sometimes sad, or depressed. On some days, he keeps eating and puking every few minutes. Surely, there is going to be a long term damage on his body and mind… but he doesn’t care. When you point it out, he gives all sorts of reasons. “Food is important, it’s fun, it’s amusing” he says and keeps going. “What’s the point of my education if I can’t eat? What would I do in my life without food? I will change the world by eating more.” And so on.

Now, how would you feel if I told you that perhaps this guy is you and the food is all the information coming from various news and individual sources?

To understand India, the first thing that you need to know is that it is neither secular nor a Hindu nation. India is a place which pagans (both believers and non-believers) can call home. It’s the last bastion of paganism.

This is the reason why it has resisted and will continue to resist Christianity and Islam, the two major world religions which do not approve of paganism. This is also the reason why it sometimes associates with mainstream Hinduism (when the religion provides an umbrella for all pagans to flourish), but sometimes dissociates from it (when diversity is challenged and one school starts to dominate) and gives way to new religions like Sikhism, Buddhism or sects like that of Ravidas, Kabirdas, Ambedkar, etc.

India does not have one religion, but thousands. It does not have one god, but millions. The only time Indians protest against totalitarianism is when it tries to bring down their gods. They have done that in the last 5,000 years and might as well do in future.

Why do most people hate Liberals?

If you belong to this tribe, that’s not even a question. That is just wrong, you would say. We will come to that.

Let me start with British journalist David Goodhart’s proposition: Anywheres Vs Somewheres.

Anywheres are well educated, mobile and tend to view the world as a global society. Therefore, they advocate universal human values such as secularism, feminism, environmentalism, freedom of expression, etc. It does not matter much to them if they live in Delhi or Bangalore, New York or London. If an interesting opportunity comes, they move. And they stay aware about the global events.

Somewheres constitute the majority of the population – around three quarters and sometimes more. They see the world from the point of view of the society they live in. They have their own values depending on the community they live in. So, for them, religion might be more important than secularism, or, their own tribe more important than humanity. They don’t look much beyond their immediate surroundings.

The two groups live in their separate worlds but these worlds constantly collide with each other, especially in politics. It must be noted that Anywheres, despite being a global minority, occupy important positions in politics, media and businesses. This is due to their education and high mobility. Besides, since they are globally connected, they use these connections to their benefit. Somewheres don’t have such privileges. A Somewhere of Bihar won’t get any support from a Somewhere of Texas.

Somewheres see Anywheres as elites, or cognitive elites perhaps, who lecture them on morality, mock their ignorance and call them bigots for being concerned about their own community rather than the global society. They feel that Anywheres don’t care about culture, religion or any kind of traditional values. Instead, they are hell-bent on destroying the traditions. In the name of improving the society, they criticise it every single day without really caring about it.

Somewheres don’t resent wealthy elites as much as they resent Anywheres. This is because, they know that they can be rich or powerful, but Anywheres will never accept them in their tribe since there is difference in values. Take Modi, for instance. He is the most powerful man in India but Liberals won’t accept him. People notice that. So, Liberals can show as much sympathy as they want towards poor people, but the same poor people would go and vote for Modi and wouldn’t give a hoot about those elite concerns.

What happens with such insecurities?

Here comes right-wing populism. It defines Anywheres as Liberals (perhaps most of them are in fact liberals) and mobilises the society against them. Liberals respond with their global network and go hard against right-wing. This, in turn, proves right-wing’s point. And Somewheres see this attack on themselves, on their own values. So, they (and they constitutes majority in any society) hate these people, whoever they are – Anywheres or Liberals. There seems little difference anyway. And majority does like simple explanations.

What is the solution?

For starters, one needs to be rooted in society. If you want to change a society, especially for better, you first need to convince people that you belong to it. If they see you as outsider, no matter how noble your intentions, they won’t accept your beliefs. First show your love, instead of hate. And whether you like it or not, you will have to make use of your identities such as religion, nationality and culture.

There are as many ideas of India as there are Indians out there — and they are in plenty. But, as the legend has it, through constant churning of a vast ocean of ideas, we get two key perspectives which often stand against each other. The same happens when we discuss the idea of India.

India is a Thali

This idea, first articulated by Shashi Tharoor, has been at the heart of India’s liberal politics. As Tharoor puts it:

We learn the following things from this perspective.

• that different cultures come together to form India.
• these cultures may or may not intermingle.
• on the whole, they complement each other well to form a united India.

India is a Dairy

The dairy term for India, coined by yours truly, seems apt because the underlying idea comes from the conservative intelligentsia (and you know how much they love and respect cows!), especially in recent times.

Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) chief Mohan Bhagwat made the following remark in 2021:

Now let’s focus on what this idea leads us to believe.

• Indians are the same people despite diversity in language, culture, form of worship, etc.
• in other words, we should remember that all the products in this dairy come from the same milk.
• the milk, in this case, is a traditional Indian system with certain characteristics of Hinduism dissolved in it.

Consequences of these ideas

At first, there doesn’t seem to be much of a clash between the two. But, when you trace their trajectory and what consequences do they lead to, you see the challenge. Let me explain.

The Thali idea acknowledges the differences that exist within India, while the Dairy idea focuses on the unity. So far, so good? The problem comes, when you see their sensitivities. Thali sensitivities — for liberals — kick in when you start talking about some kind of uniformity measures, such as uniform civil code, one language, etc. Similarly, the Dairy sensitivities catch conservatives when someone points at the differences and talks about reservations, freedom to proselytise, etc.

An alternative idea

Let me propose an alternative: India as Khichdi. No, it’s not like the American melting pot where the participating elements lose their identity and just become American. In khichdi, you can still recognise the ingredients, once the recipe is ready. You know the rice, the pulses, even vegetables or chicken if you want to toss some in (at least I do that). And there is no strictness around the ingredients either, you can easily replace one with the other. In other words, the Khichdi Model gives you the best of both worlds. To summarise,

• different elements come forward and preserve their identity.
• these elements remain together and go well with each other.
• one can talk about unity while appreciating diversity.

Khichdi is what unites India across its geography, castes, cultures, religions, language and what not, and it’s only fitting that we use the term metaphorically as well to find some sense of unity.

Last evening, when I was about to step inside my house, I was greeted by a snake at the door. A long, dark one, slithering along the floor. That sight scared me. So I hushed myself and rushed straight into my room. And as soon as I had locked myself in, a strange thought occurred to me. The thought of those stray dogs that were roaming (and barking) not very far away. They still had to live with the snake in the vicinity. Unlike me, they didn’t have any place to hide themselves in. In other words, they didn’t have a home.

What a tragedy it is to not have a home! To not have a place to retire to at the end of the day. To see others entering their concrete structures while you roam around the streets aimlessly. (If this sounds like a Bob Dylan song, trust me, it’s not a coincidence.) Anyway, coming to not having a home… True, a part of us does seek freedom beyond all bounds, but there is also a part of us that prefers to be caged in, shielding itself from the threats of this cruel world.

We all need a home.

Now, allow me to go a step further. Home exists as much in the psychological sense – if not more – as it does in the physical sense. Often we call our dwelling place our home. But the idea of home goes much beyond that. There is our house (which we call home), then there is hometown, or home country. And then, of course, we have our families with whom we share our home, and without whom this home would just be an architectural wonder (or blunder). To make matters more complex, along comes the Theseus paradox: all the above-mentioned aspects of a home are likely to change. We shift our residences, relocate to new cities, and even family members change as new ones arrive and old ones leave.

What, then, is a home?

No doubt, home is our dwelling place but it is spread across past, present and future, in our memories and dreams, in real as well as in a metaphysical world. Where we spent our childhood (which shaped our idea of home) is still our home, and so is where we are planning to move next. Then there is an abstract idea of a home in our head and we strive towards it. That is our home too. How much abstraction are we able to bring into reality – that’s a different matter. But there is always a home in the head which is a beautiful blend of all our identities, our hopes and desires, even fears. In short, home is an identity.

This means, you can be homeless even if you haven’t lost your house. That’s the modern-day homelessness I am speaking of. Where there are houses upon houses, but few homes. No one quite knows where they truly belong. There’s a strange kind of spiritual crisis one can see all around where people believe nothing (and they cannot accept it either). The way all cultural and religious identities are dying a slow death, it’s worth pondering. There remains nothing and no one else, except the individual – the lonely, miserable individual. That (identity) too is under threat now. The age-old question ‘Who Am I?’ has become meaningless, adding more meaninglessness to life if there wasn’t enough in it already. All this has rendered many to become homeless while sitting comfortably insides of what they describe as their homes and pitying the homeless of the world. That, to me, is a bigger tragedy than that of the stray dogs dealing with a snake in their vicinity.

As much as I love having chai by myself, I am equally fond of watching people sipping their chai. I like to guess what kind of person they would be based on how they prefer their chai and how they smell, sip or slurp it. I know, I am wrong with my guesses, but it does not stop me, and nor does it stop the memories from getting stirred.

I remember, once upon a time, I fell for a girl who fell for ilaichi (cardamom) chai and I followed the course. While adding sugar to chai, I am reminded of my parents – one likes excess sugar, other none. And while sipping, I almost always think of an old man who took forever to finish his chai; on the other hand, my three-year-old niece gulps down the cup in one go.

There is a cultural element too. In India, hardly any interaction – pleasant or otherwise – goes without a cup or two of chai playing the role of a witness. Come over for chai, no? Is it time for chai? Let’s have some chai. Make some chai, will you please? These are some of the expressions commonly used. And nobody ever says: do you drink chai? That would be blasphemous, for heaven’s sake.

However, it was not always ours. We got it from the British, twisted it in our way by adding milk and spices (a bizarre combination, if you think about it), and made it our own. Chai is not alone in that regard. We did the same thing with Cricket. And with English language. But, it doesn’t really matter, does it? After all, they started the loot first along with the word itself.

Chai means different things to different people. To me, it just means countless stories, and each one is as unique as the person I have shared my chai with.

Communism is an ideology, Nazism is an ideology, Hinduism is an ideology, and Islam is an ideology.

Let’s play with these words here. I am going to replace:

• Islam with Communism
• Hinduism with Nazism

Now, I am going to write a couple of news headlines for you:

Over 1000 Communists infected with Covid-19, account for 30% of all India cases after the virus spread in the Communist gathering. 

A Nazi chief-minister of a northern state of India attends a major celebration at a Nazi office. 

Just spend some time absorbing these headlines. Do they feel the same? Do they evoke the same emotions? Does it feel better or worse? Be honest with your answers.

Now, see people’s reactions to these two news headlines:

• By calling them Communists, you’re spreading Communism-phobia. They were people. Human-beings.
• What’s wrong in attending a celebration party at a Nazi office? If Communists can do that, why can’t Nazis?

See how sensible or senseless these reactions seem with our new set of words. Or do they feel the same? In either case, you decide.

In my view, words have an impact. Depending on what emotion a particular word evokes in our head, we react to a piece of information. That’s how we perceive and react. Even one substitution can change things.

However, I must say that these personal biases are neither good nor bad; they are only natural. So, instead of trying to get rid of them – which you won’t be able to – you must strive to identify and acknowledge them. And then weigh every new piece of information under the light of your own bias. Which is to accept that you are only able to see a small portion of the world with a limited view, and so is everybody else. And there is only way to move forward: by listening to each other.