Tag: bible

the hunger for education

20.09.2026

Four thousands of years, they would not let my people learn. We were Untouchables, the lowest caste. They kept the learning for themselves so that they could oppress us. That is one of the reasons that we are known as The Oppressed, The Dalits.

Yet, we have always had the hunger to learn. It is in the Mahabharata, the Hindu epic. One of the cornerstones of Indian philosophy. There you had Eklavya. He would watch the princes of the upper castes being taught archery in secret. And he learnt in secret, surpassing the prowess of the princes. His reward? For his gift, his guru asked him for his thumb to destroy his talent in archery. The world of oppression manifest.

How is hunger for education created? The Eklavya story tells you. You get an individual from a community without learning that looks at the community that does have it. Eklavya the common man lusts after the education of a prince. And therefore he outdoes the princes. The Untouchable takes the learning from the Brahmin guru, the higher caste. Similarly, I, the ethnic minority working class man, I go after the education that has been given to the white middle classes in this country, subjects like English Literature and Art History that only they can afford. We work towards the privilege that they have been given and handed on a silver platter in our stations outside of the ivory tower of learning. But we are alone on this journey, outside of the community. We have to teach ourselves. We are not coached and mentored, supported.

So in my own hunger for education, the hunger of this Dalit and Untouchable that has five degrees, there is the hunger for education of the people. Not just myself, but the community for education and social mobility. Because I have been taught by my grandfather and by his hero Dr. Ambedkhar, that the way forward for our community is to ‘educate, agitate and organise’.

And where else does this hunger from the community come from? It comes from watching my grandfather, this highly intelligent man who had been the top student in his university and his life. How when he came to this country they would not reward or rate his intelligence so he worked in non professional jobs, jobs like building and being a night watchman. I watch the unfairness in the way that they have treated the men in our community.

To me also, they have denied the rewards of my intelligence and learning. I am also a top student everywhere that I have been. And yet what have I faced in my life? What my grandfather faced. Distrust, prejudice and discrimination.

And yet, the coldness and hostility of those with the prizes has never thwarted this hunger and this love of learning. I have taken what I have wanted. I am a published scholar. I am an author. I am a curator with displays in musuems. I am a published poet. I am a published journalist. I am a professional photographer that has been published in magazines. This hunger has led me to perform. And the hunger is still not over. The hostility of the world just invites more hunger. The hunger of The People. The hunger of The Oppressed.

the law as the woman usurper’s mind and desire in the wisdom of king solomon

18.09.2026

Two women give birth at the same time. One baby dies and one survives. The women fight over the remaining baby, saying each of them is the mother. King Solomon’s solution? That we cut the baby in half and give each half to each mother. The real mother will not allow this to happen while the false mother will. This is the supposed wisdom and legal acumen of Solomon.

I wrote about how this story in the Bible reveals the monstrosity of the law. Let’s have another look at that today.

Solomon as the King, as The Father, as The Law, what does he count on? He counts on the real mother being a real mother. Not wanting her son to die. However, he also counts on the false mother, the usurper woman, to want the son to die. To want the son to be cut in half.

It does not make sense. This is a woman who has just had a baby that died. The whole reason that she took the other woman’s baby is that she wants to have a real baby. So why would the false mother even choose to have half of a dead baby? In fact, Solomon’s supposed wisdom would only draw outrage from both mothers. It would not produce the truth.

King Solomon’s law and The Father’s Law assumes that the false, usurping mother is a being of terrible violence and injustice. The bringer of death. This is the misogyny at the heart of The Father’s Law in a patriarchy. This is how the law conceives of women. The devouring Mother.

Yet, bizarrely, The Father’s Law enacts the wish of violence and devouring of the false Mother. Solomon says that he will cut the baby in half. In fact, the law models itself on this false, devouring, usurping mother.

This is a case of the law’s projection. It uses the false devouring and usurping Mother as a screen which actually reflects back its own being in injustice, in violence and duress, in usurpation. What is being mirrored is the law’s reality. It is not the false mother that is unjust. It is the law itself. Why else would the law mirror the false usurping woman?

At the same time, the legal strategy attacks the real mother. She is subjected to the symbolic violence of the law that will devour her baby.

This is the reality of the patriarchal Judaeo-Christian law that has been inherited by the West. It is based in structural misogyny and deflection. It is against The Mother. It is aggression against The Mother. And yet, this is what is described as wisdom.

king solomon’s wisdom and how the law separates, divides and usurps

14.09.2026

Two women give birth at the same time. One baby dies and one survives. The women fight over the remaining baby, saying each of them is the mother. King Solomon’s solution? That we cut the baby in half and give each half to each mother. The real mother will not allow this to happen while the false mother will. This is the supposed wisdom and legal acumen of Solomon.

I wrote about how this story in the Bible reveals the monstrosity of the law. Let’s have another look at that today.

The Judaeo-Christian law separates. From The Mother. While the case is ostensibly about overcoming the separation from the mother, and giving the mother back her child, does it not strike the reader as weird that the whole legal tactic and strategy relies on symbolically separating the mother from the child? After all, Solomon says to cut the baby in half so that the Mother will insist on being separated from her child. Why is this contradiction and paradox built into the tale, that in not separating the mother from the child, we are separating the mother from the child?

Precisely because the Father’s law, the law of King Solomon, is structural misogyny and calculated to be against The Mother. The law has a mother phobia, about which I have copiously written, being a worshipper of The Mother.

Again, the law divides the baby’s body through violence. One half is given to the lie: the lying mother. One half is given to the mother that will not accept it. That is, the law rewards the liar, it rewards the usurper, it denies the desire of the real Mother through its divisions and orderings of the body and of reality. Here, one may note, that Freud has on occasion referred to the baby of a mother as her phallus. And the phallus is the symbol of power.

Lastly, the law of the Father as usurper. What do the lying mother and the lying King have in common? That they are both liars and usurpers. The lying mother wants to take the place of the real mother. The lying king wants to take the place of the real mother as well, taking ownership of the baby’s body and dividing the spoils as he sees fit. The body is not his to give, why should he have any say in it?

This, like I said yesterday, this is the legal culture that the West has inherited. Unsound, lying, biased, misogyny, a corruption of patriarchal power. And this law presents itself as wisdom? It is this law that presents itself as the unveiling of the truth? It is this law that regulates relationships like those of mother and child? It is this law that we read stories of, watch films about? This law is nothing less than monstrosity.

solomon’s wisdom and the monstrosity of legal culture

13.09.2026

Two women give birth at the same time. One baby dies and one survives. The women fight over the remaining baby, saying each of them is the mother. King Solomon’s solution? That we cut the baby in half and give each half to each mother. The real mother will not allow this to happen while the false mother will. This is the supposed wisdom and legal acumen of Solomon.

The monstrosity of Judaeo-Christian legal culture is displayed in this story. First, the law pits itself against the false mother. The false mother stands as deceit, usurpation, as women and their lying tongues. A King’s law stands against the mother. The Father’s law against The Mother. Remember, with his law, the Father rules over the women in this case. The law is an expression of his power over them. This case does not concern him. He has no personal interest in this case. Yet it is his word that counts. The law is an expression of patriarchal power and its ordering of the social universe and the world of women.

What about the fact that the King’s law favours the real mother? But even her, the King’s law hurts. Because the King says that he will cut her baby in half. In fact, the King inflicts the imaginary symbolic violence of the law on the baby. The law is violence: duress. It is not for any reason that Freud associates the King and his Law with castration. The law is violence, imaginary violence. Symbolic violence. A violence that is directed against the body that is subject to the King and his jurisdiction.

Again, we note that the imaginary violence of the law directed against the subjugated body is also a lie. It is a fiction. The law is a lie. Yet the madness persists. The lie or the fiction is instrumental in delivering justice. There is a meta level to this. The story of King Solomon’s judgement itself is probably a fiction that is espousing what the law and justice mean too. It is lie upon lie in this legal culture to build up this legal culture and its notions of the law, justice and legal acumen for the Father. Not only does the Father lie, but he expects The Mother to lie. She has to lie that the baby is not hers so she can save its life. The lies breed lies.

Yet in this legal culture, Solomon is wise. Because he is The Father. Because he rules over women and The Mother with his decisions. Because this law creates one Mother as the bad mother, as false woman with its misogyny. Because he breeds lies. And this lie? It is called justice. This is the legal culture that the West has inherited.

competing emphases on power

30.05.2026

S: As a generalisation, I think you can say that the oppressor’s society does not affirm or emphasise its power. You see, its power is unholy. It is unjust. Moreover, this power is accepted by the degraded culture of the oppressor. However, those in the minority camp, they must affirm their power so that none consider them powerless. Indeed, even the oppressor affirms the power of the minority. You hear them saying that the minorities are accruing too much power. Their power is always a threat. Of course, the real threat is the power of the oppressors.

A: I suppose another reason that the oppressors choose not to affirm their power is because it is more effective when it is undisclosed, for the reasons that you have suggested. Because it is shameful.

S: Do you know why they are so afraid of the minorities taking power for themselves? Because they know that the minorities are just. It is the oppressor that has no law, despite claiming that they are ruled and ruling through law and order. All the oppressor has is coercion, wickedness, lies and deceit.

A: You as a minority do affirm your power.

S: Precisely. And thus, I am hated. Although I am the most powerful. As I have said before, I am like Frankenstein. I am powerful because I am fearless. And they? They are full of fear. And therefore, they are powerless.

A: They could savage you badly. Rob everything of you.

S: It does not make them any less of a coward. Sheep are hunting in a flock. The Tiger, he stands alone. He is the last surviving man and he never accepts defeat. Death before dishonour. Extinction before cowardice.

A: You that have to affirm power then, is that not then the mark of powerlessness?

S: See if anyone can compete with me fairly on any level. They cannot.

A: In popularity they compete with you and beat you.

S: That is because I have brown skin. There is no other reason. And is that a fair reason? When we talk about merit, I am the most powerful. Because I am the best. I affirm power because I am power. I am energetic because I am energy. I am the sun. There is no doubt of it. I am god upon earth.

jesus, paranoia and imperialism

15.05.2026

S: With imperialism, you can trust no one. No one is your real friend.

A: What do you mean? There’s always someone that you can trust.

S: Every friend will betray you for the empire.

A: Typical cynicism.

S: It is in the bible.

A: How so?

S: Does not Judas betray Christ? Is it not said that each one of his disciples will deny him? And why do they do it? They do it in service of the Roman Empire. The situation of Christ is the situation of the colonised in the age of Imperialism. It is the same age that we are living in now. The fact is that the oppressor kills the oppressed. The oppressor makes sure that the oppressed is betrayed.

A: No one wants to hear your interpretation of the scriptures. You are not even Christian.

S: Be that as it may be, the oppressed can read the life of the oppressed.

A: Any more jewels to bestow upon us with these readings?

S: In a selfish and greedy regime, where arrogance and a lack of empathy are the hallmarks of those supposedly successful in that society, where there is only the worship of wealth and status rather than spiritual growth, a genius like Christ can only encounter envy, hatred, jealousy and betrayal from even those that call himself his friends and peers. This has been the way throughout the whole of human history. Because those that are the worst lead. Those that are the worst exploit others and win power. Those that are not fit to be called human beings have to prove themselves superior.

A: This lesson is obviously not about Christ, is it?

S: It is about the present, with the rise of fascism in the world and where, unmistakably, powers like America and Russia are clearly empires, as well as the so-called ‘developed’ world which lords it over the ‘developing’ world by exploiting their natural resources and manpower. This age of capitalism, globalisation, what is it except for a new empire, neo-imperialism? It is this world that we live in, this world of the empire. And in it, Christ once more has to watch betrayal after betrayal. Because the clever man, the better man, the god on earth, the genius, the master of living, he has to watch the wretches around him sell him out and deny him.

A: They say that the colonised have a persecution complex. They suffer from paranoia.

S: It is not paranoia. Freud, himself the persecuted Jew, he said that even the paranoiac is not without justification. Man is a wolf to man. It is what the persecuted know. And Freud knew more than most – he was also a genius in Nazi Germany. They hated his cleverness. The colonised and the geniuses know the truth of this society of imperialism, hate and oppression.

the bravery of the writer, the polymath and the anarchist

30.04.2026

A: Do you not think it is foolish to write in this day and age, to be a thinker, to be a speaker? They would gnash at you and claw your throat for expressing an opinion.

S: The mark of the writer is that he is brave. Braver than most. He expresses what he thinks with no apology. He does express an opinion. And not only the opinion, but also himself.

A: And you count yourself as brave?

S: As the bravest. Because I say exactly what I think. I am published and I am damned by them.

A: You are always boasting about how brave you are.

S: The only thing that stays the steel is compassion.

A: How brave are you?

S: It is brave to be a writer. To have a voice. To stand up against everyone. To be different. It is brave to be a polymath. To go into whatever field seems tempting and to become an expert in it. To have the bravery of the self to be able to bend this mind to anything and everything. To do degree after degree, starting from scratch every time for the long haul and to plan to do degrees after that in the future. To be a generalist in a world that insists on blind tunnel vision and specialisation. It is brave to be an anarchist. To believe in the self when no one would have you believe in the self. To go up against the biggest bully, threat and terrorist in the world which is the state. To go up against the slaves to the state and their bullshit. To go up against this world in every way. This mind is brave. This body is brave too. Everything about me is brave. Because I am the hero. I am the god. I am The Tiger.

A: Is not bravery foolish?

S: It is only foolish to be a coward. Because a coward lacks the wisdom of bravery. The truly brave, they have thought about what it is to be a coward. They have fully gauged the contempt of cowardice, its limitations. The brave are free. The coward is a slave. The coward cannot become a writer. Because he is scared to express himself and cares too much what others think, others that can do fuck all except for judge, and that incorrectly too. The coward cannot become a polymath. The coward lacks wits. The coward cannot dare different fields. The coward cannot be an anarchist. Because a slave cannot become the most powerful. The slave cannot go against the bully that is the state. They fear and therefore they obey and lick boots.

A: Boast after boast.

S: All justified my good boy. Everyone in this world searches for freedom. And I? I am free. The free are brave.

the rationality of death

23.04.2026

S: Camus asks this question, why should we not commit suicide? It is the one question. The great question.

A: And what do you think of Camus?

S: Does a man need a reason to live? Why does he need a reason to live? Why can he not just live life? And this is what Camus says. That there is no reason to live. Just to live life.

A: Can you just live life without any meaning in it?

S: Who knows? Viktor Frankl says that you have to have a meaningful life.

A: Why do you keep on living yourself?

S: Do you know something? The most rational thing would be to die.

A: Surely, you jest.

S: Not at all. This life is confusion. This life is suffering. Hurt and disappointment. This life is a cage. This life is isolation. This life is one full of suspicion, misunderstanding, prejudice, hate, injustice, apathy and hostility. How sweet it would be to free from all this! The rational decision would be to die. It is no surprise why people choose to commit suicide.

A: Why then do you live if there is nothing to live for?

S: Duty ties me down to the earth when I should be sitting in heaven. The family. The community. The Oppressed. The Mother. The duty to keep on living for others. The duty not to be known as a coward that could not face life when I must be brave because I am the warrior and the splendour of Punjab. For myself, I would not live.

A: Do you really think that those poor souls that commit suicide are free? That they have escaped this world which you find so mean and cheap?

S: What else? Do you know where psychologists say that you find the utmost happiness? In a flow state. When you forget about everything else except for the activity that you love. In which the self is completely extinguished. What about sex? For that moment of bliss when you come, you forget everything. It is the little death. The utmost happiness is death. It is the rational decision.

A: The rational decision is life. To live. To make the world a better place. To fight those that would make it a hell.

S: Why do you think god has come down upon the earth? Because it was too full of sin. That is why he is reborn every time, when sin outweighs goodness. But has he come down from heaven for happiness? No. The common crowd follow happiness. The god follows duty. His mother called for him because they had tried to take The Mother’s honour. The people prayed for him to come into the world because they were oppressed. They asked for a champion. Duty binds the god to this world. The work has not been achieved yet. The Revolution has not come. I am the child of destiny, of fate. The gifts have been given to me. I am The Tiger. And since I am The Tiger, I have to show energy. I have to show life. The seductions of easeful death are great. The mouth waters. But there are only two deaths available to The Tiger. A glorious death in battle. Or in bed. There is no real war. And there are too many years left still to be lived for this peaceful death in the bed. So we live. With reluctance.

dishonourable peace or honourable revolution

21.04.2026

A: The words ‘peace’ and ‘revolution’ in Hindi rhyme. ‘Shanti’ and ‘Kranti’.

S: What would you rather have? Shanti ya kranti? Peace or Revolution?

A: I am sure that most people would say peace.

S: I do not.

A: You would rather not have calm in your life?

S: Where peace is dishonourable, it is unacceptable. The choice is simple.

A: You think the Revolution is honourable?

S: What else?

A: Why talk always about honour?

S: Because we come from the honour society. We are honour. The Mother who we worship is our honour.

A: How is peace dishonourable?

S: Do you know what Sophie Scholl’s last words were before the Nazis killed her for resisting them? She said, “How can we expect righteousness to prevail when there is hardly anyone willing to give himself up individually to a righteous cause?” We are living in the times of the fascists. We are living in the times of the haters and the cowards. We are living in the time of discrimination, injustice and lies. To accept peace on their terms, with those that are dishonourable, is tantamount to being dishonourable onself. And if we have spent our whole life fighting for our honour, for the honour of our mother, how could we look at ourselves in the mirror or look anyone else in the face? To have honour is to be righteous. It is to fight for righteousness. The Revolution over a dishonourable peace every time.

A: What is so honourable about The Revolution?

S: The Revolution is against the dishonourable in the name of honour, of The Mother’s honour. The Mother is honour. The Mother is us.

A: They hate you for saying that The Mother is honour and that she is your honour.

S: So what? Everything that they say and do is delusion and oppression. It is a lie. Their thoughts are lies and their lives are lies. One does not listen to a fool or a coward. That is what they do. Not us. We are Punjabi. We are the Tigers of Punjab. A real man does not listen to those that would make him a non-man.

A: Live without calm. Live without peace.

S: I am blessed that I live without peace. I am blessed that I am the warrior. I am blessed that I have chosen The Revolution. Because in The Revolution there is glory, the bliss of glory. There is only one lack. A warrior worthy to be the enemy of The Tiger. The enemy does not have a Karana in their midst. All they have is corruption.

A: You are an intellectual terrorist. That is what they think of you.

S: The intellectual terrorist is them. They live their law through coercion and duress. Their taxes and their exploitation of the Oppressed is gained through coercion and duress. They pretend there is the illusion of choice and freedom when all they have is their cage and their prison. Their thought is a cage and a prison. Their thought is violence against us and The Mother. Yes, they are the intellectual terrorists. And I? I am god. I am the liberator. I am The Tiger. I am freedom. The ungovernable wild beast.

at the end of the long day

19.04.2026

S: It is the end of the long day. What is there to say now?

A: One can reflect upon a day, a moment, a life.

S: You ask for me to reflect? In this day, aside from work, I went upon the Cutty Sark. I went to a charity bookshop. I went to a fayre where I bought a biography of Marilyn Munroe for three pounds. I listened to music concerts all day. I went to Canary Wharf to look upon the waterfront and the big skyscrapers. I went into the parks around the Embankment. I had dinner with my girlfriend. I learnt Spanish, French, Hindi, Punjabi and Urdu. I read psychology articles. I learnt Art History. I ate a chocolate profiterole dessert from Marks and Spencer’s. I listened to Hindi music from the films.

A: Are you not tired? You have spent this whole week rushing around.

S: You know that I do not get tired. Especially when the sun is out. But as I was walking the Cutty Sark, which is a boat that is stationary, I thought to myself that this is a metaphor for self-reflection. We are upon the journey of life. But then, we take out a moment from this journey. The ship stops sailing. We explore the frozen journey, to find out where it is taking us, what it is. We become explorers of the pause.

A: Where would you like this journey to take you?

S: To the beating heart of the enemy.

A: That is your wish? You could have love.

S: One loves the enemy. One wants to clutch at the enemy. To hold them the closest. So that one could squeeze what is inside out of them.

A: Forget enmity. You are the lover. You have a lover.

S: To forget the enemy is to forget myself. I am the warrior.

A: Forget. Tell me a story.

S: Once there was this king that rinsed everything outside of himself because of her. And she watched him rinsing everything out of himself as he grew smaller and smaller. He almost became too small and she did nothing to stop him. Because she enjoyed how much she tormented him and wanted to see if there was any limit to what he would do for her. There was not. But one day, when he was at the end, when there was almost nothing left to rinse, this king stopped. She did not love him. She was not the lover. She was only one that he thought that he knew and loved. She had not liked that he was the king and would want him diminished. He cast her off. And there was so much in him that even now there was more than anyone else. And he kept on growing and growing. He was the splendour of the sun.

A: What happened to her?

S: The life of those without love is the everyday story of the people here. Ask any of them how they live their loveless lives of lies, hate and oppression. That is her story too.