Agni Chakra

(Circles of Fire)

(Chapter 21)

By Kathleen Jayawardene

Translated by Ranga Chandrarathne and Edited

by Indeewara Thilakarathne

Why should Amritha give me an extract of a letter Karl Marx sent to his daughter Lora? Does she know the Leftist political organisation that I represented sometime ago? By now, this political organisation has no clout. Though she would have heard about a political organisation which is almost non-existent, she could not have known it as Kalinga and I was active in the organisation about twenty years ago. It was questionable whether she had even been born by then.

Amritha showed me an extract of a letter dated March 12, 1866 which Marx sent to his daughter. Her ulterior motive became clear to me only when I read the extract. I considered her interest in opening up new avenues for me as an indication that she liked me. On the other hand I knew that she wanted to instil in me her deep devotion and admiration of the doctrine of the Buddha. Though Shantha had the same urge at a certain stage, it had been gradually waning off.

Amritha had found the Marx's extract from a collection of letters translated into Sinhala by Ven. Mandawala Pagnavansa thera. The letter was in a booklet entitled 'Nobuduwo Bodun Dakithi' (Non Buddhists see the Buddha).

"Most of my time I'm walking and breathing fresh air. I read nothing and write less. I go to bed at 9.00 p.m. Generally, I subside into the emotional state of non-existence that Buddhism considers to be the height of human delicacy".

I thought if Shantha had found the above extract, she would also have read it before me.

I thought whether I can consider Amritha and Shantha as two fruits in the same branch.

Subtle differences are there between the two fruits in the same branch or two lemons in one stalk. They are only visible to a keen observer.

Sometimes I doubted whether Amritha represented ' Jatika Chintanaya' . It was because I vehemently opposed it. Sometimes, Shantha spoke of Jathika Chintanaya and Sinhaleseness. But there was an attitudinal difference between them. I thought that it can be divided as traditional thinking and instantaneous thinking. But can thinking be instantaneous ? Is the thinking based on matter? Often Shantha comes with ideas and views borrowed from her mother, elders or from the tradition. Apparently, Amritha has no such tradition.

Once she told me that her mother died when she was a three months old. Which factors led to her developing strong feelings for country, nation and religion?

"Amritha, I heard that you every day light a lamp for the Buddha", I said one day smiling. I said so as Shantha was engaged in religious activities at the appointed time and not knowing that Amritha was engage in such activities.

"Yes, Sir , but not everyday", Amritha said.

"That means..."

"There are days I fail to light the lamp for the Buddha".

"Is it ok by you?"

"What's wrong with it..? "

"If you light a lamp, you should light it everyday at the same time, shouldn't you? "

"That's for a deity. But, Sir, Buddha is not a divinity".

I was confused and I wanted to ask why she should light the lamp.

"Then, why, do you light the lamp for the Buddha?"

"I do it knowing well that Buddha has no use of the lamp or the glass of water I offer", she said attentively.

"If the Buddha was alive, then, at least, the glass of water would be useful. What I mean by worshiping the Buddha is to have an interaction with myself. Why should I have an appointed time for it|?"

I was confused sensing the subtle difference between Amritha and Shantha.

"What are the profits and losses in this transaction?"

"I can think twice about errors that I might commit ", she said thoughtfully.

"Errors? What you called errors is experiencing life itself? "

"What I mean by errors are those from which I have to suffer now or later", Amritha said.

" The suffering caused by those experiences"

"Amritha, you have not yet enjoyed life?"

Looking into my eyes, turned away and said "Sir, why not". I was shocked. What caused my shock and surprise is what I was yearning for such a long time.

"I never knew it!"

"That's an old incident which happened during my O/Ls", she laughed heartily.

"He was a married man...Those days I thought I loved him a lot. But now I know that was not love!"

"How did you come to that realisation?"

"Sir, if that was love, it could not have been waning off in this manner..."

"Then..?"

" I was a bit happy because of him; but suffered a lot ; had to pocket out insults ...later I came to terms with it"

"But...isn't that what you call life? Is it humane to destroy the momentary pleasure because of consequences? "

"Sir, wasn't it too long time to suffer for a momentary pleasure! "

I felt like having an electric shock with a kind of awakening and pressure. The question "wasn't it too long to suffer for a momentary pleasure?" echoed in me. I looked at Amritha with surprise.

Are the roots of her incredible willpower in the Sinhalese -Buddhist thinking?

But did all the women who surrounded me have the Sinhalese-Buddhist hide?

Why should I think so much about these problems?

It is said that the Buddha taught that you should not search for roots in any thing. Is it only those men who would be tired off by searching origins? I thought, however, that it was me who had been more confused than Amritha or Shantha. What caused this? I, once again, tried to identify subtle features in Amritha's and Shantha's characters.

If Amritha is good it is not because of any external moral guidance. She refrains from immoral engagements as she does not want to face their adverse consequences. It's an avoidance of pressure.

But Shantha is good not because of such experiences. The chamber of tradition she is imprisoned in has been her own creation.

At early stages, I tried to convince Shantha of the futility of her attempts to hide sexuality in a bottom of an unfathomable pit. I often hinted her that a woman who denounced sexuality would inherit an unhappy married life. Those hints were given because of her understanding in philosophical.

One day I gave Shantha a brief Sinhalese translation of a passage on sexuality in the Su Nu Ching ,a book in Taoism of Lao-tzu who lived in the sixth Century BC in China. "All that which would make man impotent is caused by wrong love making" stated the book. Through so many incidents, I have hinted her why people don't like women who do not respond to sex.

Once I showed her an album of photographs depicting statues in the temple of Khajuraho in India featuring different postures of love making.

That was because I knew she had a devotion to gods. I asked her with a smile why the outer walls of the sacred temple had been desecrated with dirt. I also offered her an explanation found in a book.

The book described the insightful vision of the artists who built this temple. It was said that passion and sexuality is only a superficial condition. It further says that those statues symoblised that those who have been prisoners of sex without enjoying

sex, could not enter the temple or the sacred area. That those who enter the temple could see no statues of gods but emptiness and that it implies it is only a person who enjoyed life can only enter into self, I stressed Shantha.

Totally disregarding my main objectives, Shantha said that those images were made to satisfy the god 'Indra'. Since different postures of the statues reminded one a foreplay between Shiva and the power, the god 'Indra' was jubilant and caused rains, she said nullifying my objectives.

I really did not know why Shantha had not seen the nexus between spirituality and sexuality even in her youth. Why the Shiva in Hindu trinity though depicted in the form an ascetic, is symoblised by ' male sex'? Has Shantha ever thought of it? It is therefore, that I was reminded of Freud's new model of human mind. It is the concept of Id and Ego. Has Shantha faced this situation? Has she considered me a womaniser because of this? Can the union between 'man' and 'woman' be interpreted as sexual misbehaviour? I was not engaged in misbehaviour.

I can remember that Bible says "If you look at a woman with lustful eyes, it amounts to committing adultery". If it is so, is there a single a saint who does not fall into this category?

I know that the manifestation of sexual energy is a form of possession by devils. I have seen uncountable times my mother getting into trances. Can't I do a research paper on psychology about mother's wild dances brandishing a burning torch? But have I got such a clear mind? On the other hand, would it be a self-destructive act?

It was a German, a doctor D. Pierre who researched on devil possession. In his book, a case of nuns Possessed by devils showed the same kind of shiver.

However, Amritha's view that 'Freud was more concerned about sexuality' is similar to the views of Karl Jung who gave a new dimension to psychoanalysis. Karl Jung saw the child's attraction to mother's breasts as a natural instinct towards nutrition.

On the other hand, I don't know whether Amritha represents Freud's or Jung's ideas. She who refuses all 'isms' transacts with her own soul. The half-baked and unripe nature in most university students is manifested in Amrita as in over ripe and rotten nature.

I thought that if I married Amritha what would have been the changes that would have occurred in my life. It is true that Shantha had tried to brighten my life after the marriage.

But...?

If Shantha had spread fragrance in the night like a flower of Kumudu which blossoms in every night , Amritha would have been a freakishly bloomed lotus in the night?

Footnote

Jathika Chintanaya- School of thought which is said to be the indigenous thinking.

Kumudu- A nocturnal white flower.