Literary Analysis

Zen, the Absolute Nothingness, and the Transcendence of Nihilism

The thought of Zen is often misunderstood, especially when its doctrine of “absolute nothingness” is taken as a form of philosophical nihilism. Such a misinterpretation overlooks the essence of Zen teaching, which is not trapped within the narrow duality of “being” and “non-being.” On the contrary, Zen transcends these terms, showing that truth lies neither exclusively in existence nor in non-existence, but in a field where these distinctions cease to hold absolute power. Thus, the “nothingness” of Zen is not the emptiness of despair but the openness that contains everything. In Zen tradition, the concept of Buddha-nature illuminates this very paradox. It is described as a positive term for absolute nothingness, encompassing both “being” and “non-being” in an ultimate way. This is not a logical contradiction but a higher, paradoxical logic: the “logic of being/non-being.” In Zen experience, existence and non-existence do not negate one another but coexist, revealing a deeper dimension of reality. Buddha-nature, therefore, is not an abstract metaphysical concept but the very dynamic reality that permeates all phenomena, giving them life and meaning. This stance has contemporary significance. In a world of modernity and globalization, where traditional certainties have been shaken and nihilism often appears as the dead end of human thought, the perspective of Zen’s “absolute nothingness” offers a way out. Since it does not deny emptiness but embraces it as a creative principle, it can transform the experience of meaninglessness into an experience of freedom and openness. Religion, if it draws from this perspective, does not remain trapped in rigid theologies nor dissolve into deconstruction. Instead, it can face nihilism not through denial but by transcending it, showing that at the heart of nothingness lies the infinite potential of being and non-being together. Zen, then, is not a path that leads to nihilism, but a way of overcoming it. Its teaching of “absolute nothingness” and its logic of “being/non-being” call us to see reality beyond the dilemmas imposed by Western rationalism. Within this opening, religion, philosophy, and human existence as a whole can find new ways to reconcile with emptiness and transform it into a source of freedom, meaning, and creativity.

Interdependence in Zen: A Network of Boundless Relation

At the heart of Zen thought lies the idea that nothing exists autonomously or in isolation. Every being, every phenomenon, every moment is interconnected with all others. This empirical realization, which surpasses philosophical theory and becomes lived experience in Zen practice, is expressed through the term “interdependence.” The individual is not a closed, self-sufficient subject but a node in an infinite web of relations. When Zen speaks of “emptiness” (śūnyatā), it does not mean that things are nonexistent but that they exist only in relation to others, while still maintaining their “ownness” or particularity. A flower, for example, is not just a “flower”: within it are the sun, the rain, the soil, the air, time, the labor of the farmer. Remove these, and the flower ceases to exist as a distinct being. The uniqueness of each being is recognized and exists only in coexistence with others. In this way, Zen teaches us that every form of life is inseparably bound to the whole of the cosmos. The experience of this interdependence has deep existential and ethical consequences. First, it dismantles the illusion of isolated existence, which often breeds arrogance or despair. Second, it cultivates compassion: if “I” and “you” are not absolutely separate, then caring for the other is simultaneously caring for the self. In this light, kindness is not a moral imperative but the natural expression of the unity of life.
Zen calls us to live with awareness of this interdependence. Daily meditation practice is not withdrawal from the world but a return to the deeper experience of unity with it. In every breath, every sound, every glance, the continuous interweaving of all things is revealed. Then the individual recognizes that there is no “inside” and “outside, ” but only the open, shared life that includes everything. Thus, interdependence in Zen is not merely a philosophical doctrine but a way of seeing the world as a fabric of mutual relations, inviting us to live with humility, gratitude, and compassion.

The “Ownness” in Emptiness

Buddhists emphasize “emptiness” and say that all things are empty. While this is a central point in Buddhism generally and in Zen in particular, it can be misleading, or at least very difficult for Western thought to grasp. The phrase “all things are empty” might be better rendered as “all things are exactly as they are.” A pine tree is a pine tree, bamboo is bamboo, a dog is a dog, a cat is a cat, you are you, I am I, she is she. Everything is different from everything else. And yet, since each being maintains its uniqueness and particularity, they are free from conflict with one another. This is the meaning of saying that all things are empty. A pine tree does not feel superior to bamboo. Bamboo does not feel inferior to a pine tree. A dog does not feel superior to a cat, nor a cat inferior to a dog. Humans may believe that plants and animals entertain such thoughts, but this is merely a projection of human capacities onto non-human dimensions. In reality, plants and animals live naturally, without judgments of value. Humans, however, are different: we constantly compare ourselves to others. Why is he so smart? Why am I not so gifted? Why is she so beautiful? Why am I not as beautiful? Some feel superior, others inferior. This happens because, unlike plants and animals, we humans possess self-consciousness, and through it, we look at ourselves from the outside, comparing ourselves with others.
Thus, although we are “ourselves, ” we are not truly “ourselves, ” since we view ourselves from the outside. In daily life, there are moments when we are “here” with ourselves—moments of vague unity. But at other times we are “there”—seeing ourselves from outside. We swing between here and there, moment by moment: homeless, without a place to settle. There is always a rift within us. Plants and animals, on the other hand, are exactly as they are, because they lack self-consciousness. This is the essential difference between humans and other beings.
This characteristic of humans has a positive aspect. Because we have self-awareness and are constantly thinking, we can plan, reflect, imagine ideals, and thus create culture, science, art, and so on. Yet this positive side is also problematic, for in seeing ourselves from the outside we become divided from ourselves. We are here and there, inside and outside. This constant oscillation produces our fundamental anxiety, which plants and animals do not have. Only human beings are not “exactly as they are.”
D. T. Suzuki often spoke of beings “as-they-are.” Plants and animals live their “ownness.” But we humans are separated from it; we are never fully “as-we-are.” As long as we move between here and there, inside and outside, comparing ourselves with others, we are restless. This anxiety is not accidental or peculiar to some individuals—it belongs to being human itself. Strictly speaking, it is not that we “have” this anxiety, but rather that we are this anxiety. How can we overcome this fundamental anxiety and return to our “ownness”? This is the task of religion. In Genesis, after every act of creation, “God saw that it was good.” When He created Adam and Eve, He blessed them and saw that they too were good. But “good” here cannot be merely moral. Rather, it affirms that creation is ontologically good—that all things are “in their own state.” God created a tree exactly as a tree, and it was good; a bird exactly as a bird, a fish exactly as a fish. Adam is Adam, Eve is Eve. They are good because they are as they are.

Beyond Subject and Object

A well-known Zen saying states: “Before one studies Zen, mountains are mountains and rivers are rivers. After some understanding, mountains are not mountains and rivers are not rivers. When one is enlightened, mountains are truly mountains and rivers are truly rivers.” This short passage illustrates the central Mahāyāna Buddhist doctrine of absolute emptiness (śūnyatā).
Before studying Zen, one affirms the existence of mountains and rivers, differentiates them, and most importantly, objectifies them—they are external realities set apart from the subject (the self). This duality of subject and object obstructs realization of the true self, or Buddha-nature. Inquiry into the self in objectified terms leads to infinite regression: “Who am I? Who sees these mountains?” Each subject becomes object in turn. Liberation requires an existential realization that Buddha-nature lies beyond objectifying thought—beyond subject/object dichotomy. This “emptying” of duality is the perception of non-differentiation. The second phrase—mountains are not mountains—marks the stage of non-differentiation after some insight. But even here, a subtle duality remains: differentiation vs. non-differentiation. To realize Buddha-nature requires negating even this non-differentiation—an “absolute negation, ” which paradoxically is also absolute affirmation. This paradox of affirmation/negation, or the “logic of being/non-being, ” is the essence of Buddha-nature.

The Essence of Buddha-Nature

What is Buddha-nature? Dōgen reinterpreted the traditional doctrine that all sentient beings have Buddha-nature, arguing instead that all beings, sentient and non-sentient, are Buddha-nature. He sought to undermine the tendency to objectify Buddha-nature as a kind of substantial essence. For Dōgen, Buddha-nature is not an essence humans possess, but the dynamic unfolding of existence itself. Traditionally, liberation meant realizing an inner essence beyond ordinary existence. But for Dōgen, this objectifies Buddha-nature and traps us in duality. Instead, Buddha-nature is identical with the transient phenomena of everyday life: grass, trees, stones. Impermanence itself is Buddha-nature. Its essence is revealed in the momentary arising and passing of ordinary things.

Practice and Enlightenment

While philosophical aspects of Zen matter, Zen theorists insist knowledge must be realized in daily life. If impermanence itself is Buddha-nature, how should one practice? Dōgen answered through shikantaza (“just sitting”): practice and enlightenment are one. Practice is enlightenment; enlightenment is practice. This view frees meditation from ego-centered intention. Shikantaza is regarded as the purest practice.

Critical Analyses of Western Philosophy

Western philosophy, from its ancient Greek beginnings to modern and contemporary developments, has sought to understand reality through concepts such as being, essence, truth, and reason. Yet the tradition is not monolithic. Within it, critical analyses of Western philosophy have emerged—from Nietzsche and Heidegger to postmodern thinkers and even comparative dialogue with Eastern traditions like Buddhism—that challenge its foundations. These critiques highlight both the achievements and the limitations of Western philosophy, exposing its metaphysical assumptions and its tendency toward dualism, objectification, and abstraction. Examining these critiques allows us to understand the relationship between traditional and critical thought, as well as the differences and similarities in their approaches.

The Relationship: Philosophy with and against Itself

Western philosophy is marked by an internal dynamic of self-criticism. Thinkers like Descartes, Kant, Hegel, Nietzsche, Heidegger, Derrida, and Foucault do not simply abandon philosophy but interrogate its foundations. This creates a paradoxical relationship: critical analyses arise from within the Western tradition even as they destabilize it.

• Nietzsche critiqued Western metaphysics as “Platonism for the masses, ” arguing that Christianity and philosophy both denied life in favor of illusory transcendent ideals. Yet he used the tools of philosophy—philology, logic, and genealogy—to expose these illusions.
• Heidegger continued this self-critical turn, arguing that Western philosophy had forgotten the question of Being by reducing it to beings and their attributes. His project of “destruction” (Destruktion) aimed not at destroying philosophy but at retrieving its hidden origins.
• Postmodern thinkers such as Derrida and Lyotard pushed this critique further, deconstructing claims of absolute truth, universal reason, and grand narratives.

Thus, the relationship is dialectical: Western philosophy sustains itself by critiquing itself. Critical analysis is not external opposition but philosophy reflecting on its own limits.

One of the clearest differences between traditional Western philosophy and its critical analyses lies in their stance toward metaphysics.

• Traditional philosophy (Plato, Aristotle, Aquinas, Descartes, Kant) generally affirms stable foundations: eternal Forms, substance, God, or the categories of reason. Knowledge is grounded in universal structures, and truth is conceived as correspondence to reality.
• Critical philosophy challenges these assumptions:
•  
  • Nietzsche’s “death of God” dismantles transcendent foundations.
  • Heidegger’s critique of metaphysics rejects the dominance of presence, substance, and fixed essences.
  • Derrida argues that meaning is always deferred (différance), undermining metaphysical notions of closure and identity.

This difference is not merely theoretical but existential. Traditional metaphysics seeks security in permanence; critical thought accepts impermanence, flux, and the instability of meaning.

Despite their opposition, critical analyses share important similarities with the tradition they critique.

1. Shared language and concepts: Even when Nietzsche rejects Platonism, he uses the Platonic framework of “truth vs. appearance” to overturn it. Derrida deconstructs concepts like logos, presence, and truth, but these are inherited from Greek philosophy.
2. Commitment to rational inquiry: Whether affirming or deconstructing metaphysics, both sides rely on argument, reflection, and textual engagement. Nietzsche’s aphorisms, Heidegger’s etymologies, and Derrida’s close readings remain philosophical in method.
3. Concern with truth: Even when denying absolute truth, critical philosophy still seeks authenticity, openness, or justice. Heidegger sought a more primordial truth of Being; Derrida insisted on an “undeconstructible justice.” The quest for truth remains, though redefined.

Cross-Cultural Critical Perspectives

Interestingly, critical analyses of Western philosophy often converge with non-Western traditions. For example:

• Buddhism and Zen emphasize impermanence, emptiness, and interdependence, challenging the Western fixation on substance and permanence. Heidegger’s “nothingness” and Nietzsche’s “innocence of becoming” resonate with these ideas, though they remain embedded in Western categories.
• Whitehead’s process philosophy emphasizes relationality and becoming, akin to Buddhist interdependence, though he retains a metaphysical God that reintroduces dualism.

These comparisons reveal that Western self-critique often parallels insights long developed in other traditions, highlighting both its originality and its limitations. Critical analyses of Western philosophy reveal a complex interplay of continuity and rupture. They are born within the tradition but move against its dominant metaphysical tendencies, challenging concepts of essence, permanence, and absolute truth. Yet they remain deeply indebted to the very heritage they critique, inheriting its language, methods, and quest for meaning. Their differences lie in their rejection of metaphysical foundations, while their similarities rest in their shared philosophical commitment to rational critique. Taken together, they illustrate that philosophy is not static but a living dialogue with itself, always reinterpreting, re-questioning, and reimagining its own possibilities.

Zen thinkers analyze Western philosophy and theology through the logic of being/non-being. Western thought traditionally privileges the positive—being, life, permanence—while treating non-being, death, impermanence as derivative. Eastern thought, especially Buddhism, gives equal weight to both. Zen’s “nothingness” is not relative non-being but absolute nothingness: the original ground prior to positive/negative division. This contrasts with Western metaphysics, e.g. Platonism (reality as transcendent Forms) and Christianity (God beyond the world). Zen instead affirms what Nishitani Keiji called a “trans-descendence.” Nietzsche, for example, exposed Western metaphysics and Christianity as false constructs erected to avoid nothingness. He urged facing the void directly—what he called the innocence of becoming. Yet Zen critics note Nietzsche still posits reality in objectified terms (life, becoming), thus maintaining subject/object duality. Whitehead’s philosophy of universal relativity aligns more closely with Buddhist interdependence: each entity contains all others. Yet his concept of God as primordial, beyond time and space, reintroduces duality between permanence and change, God and world. Thus, Whitehead too fails to transcend duality fully. Tillich compared the Kingdom of God (Christianity) with Nirvāṇa (Buddhism). He argued Christianity emphasizes all people united in God’s Kingdom, while Buddhism emphasizes all things united in Nirvāṇa. This risks misunderstanding: though Buddha-nature is the presence of all phenomena, realization occurs only in human consciousness. Thus humans hold a special, though not superior, role. Tillich, by prioritizing things over humans, missed Zen’s logic of being/non-being. Zen also critiques Tillich’s engagement with modern secular movements (nationalism, scientism, Marxism, humanism). Tillich approached them as a “participating observer” on the cultural-historical level. Zen insists they must be faced existentially, as a “self-involved participant, ” through religious awareness. Only a religious encounter with and transcendence of nihilism makes religion truly necessary in the modern world.

Christian Theology and Buddhism

Christian theology and Buddhism are two of the most influential spiritual traditions in human history. Christianity, rooted in the revelation of God in Jesus Christ, emphasizes faith in the divine, salvation through grace, and the love of God as the foundation of existence. Buddhism, originating from the teachings of Siddhartha Gautama (the Buddha), focuses on the cessation of suffering through insight into impermanence, interdependence, and the realization of emptiness. At first glance, these two traditions appear to operate in radically different frameworks: one theistic, the other non-theistic; one grounded in divine transcendence, the other in existential awakening. Yet in the modern era, dialogue between Christian theology and Buddhism has deepened, revealing areas of surprising resonance as well as irreducible difference.

God and Emptiness

At the heart of Christian theology is the affirmation of a personal God, creator of heaven and earth, who reveals Himself in history. For Christians, God is both transcendent and immanent, utterly beyond the world and yet intimately present within it. By contrast, Buddhism avoids metaphysical claims about a creator God. Instead, its central concern is existential: the recognition of suffering (dukkha) and the path to liberation. The Buddhist teaching of śūnyatā (emptiness) affirms that all phenomena lack permanent essence; reality is a dynamic interplay of interdependent relations. Despite this difference, Christian theologians such as Paul Tillich and Thomas Merton have found meaningful parallels. Tillich argued that God should not be understood as “a being” among beings, but as the “Ground of Being”—a reality that cannot be objectified. This recalls the Buddhist insight that ultimate truth cannot be grasped as a fixed entity. Similarly, Merton, in dialogue with Zen thinkers, saw in emptiness not nihilism but a spiritual depth that resonates with the Christian experience of self-emptying (kenosis) in Christ.

Salvation and Liberation

Christian theology emphasizes salvation as reconciliation with God through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The human problem is sin—alienation from God—and the solution is divine grace. By contrast, Buddhism identifies suffering as the central problem of existence. The cause of suffering is ignorance and attachment, and liberation (nirvāṇa) comes through wisdom and compassionate practice. Though distinct, these paths share certain resonances. Christian mystics such as Meister Eckhart spoke of detachment from self and union with God in ways that echo Buddhist teachings on letting go of clinging. Similarly, the Christian notion of agapē (selfless love) resonates with the Buddhist cultivation of compassion (karuṇā). Both traditions insist that the transformation of the self requires not simply intellectual belief but a radical reorientation of existence.

Christ and Buddha

A central point of divergence remains the role of Christ and the Buddha. In Christianity, Christ is not merely a teacher but the incarnate Word of God, the unique mediator between humanity and God. Faith in Christ is thus indispensable. In Buddhism, the Buddha is not a savior in a metaphysical sense but an enlightened guide whose life and teachings point others toward awakening. Liberation is ultimately dependent on one’s own realization of the Dharma, not on divine intervention. Yet dialogue can also see these figures as embodying universal dimensions of human spiritual possibility. The image of Christ’s self-emptying love and the Buddha’s compassionate awakening can both be read as archetypes of human transformation, pointing beyond ego toward universal truth.

Community and Practice

Both Christianity and Buddhism stress the importance of community. The Christian Church is the body of Christ, where believers gather in worship and sacraments to participate in divine life. In Buddhism, the Sangha is one of the Three Jewels (together with Buddha and Dharma), providing support for practitioners on the path. Both traditions recognize that spiritual growth is not an isolated endeavor but occurs within communal bonds. Practice also reveals both similarities and contrasts. Christian prayer, sacraments, and liturgy emphasize relationship with God through word and ritual. Buddhist meditation emphasizes awareness, mindfulness, and insight into reality as-it-is. Yet Christian contemplative prayer and Buddhist meditation often converge in cultivating silence, presence, and inner transformation.

Convergences and Challenges in Dialogue

The dialogue between Christian theology and Buddhism has been fruitful in modern times, yet challenges remain. Christianity risks misunderstanding Buddhist emptiness as nihilism, while Buddhism may see Christian theism as attachment to an externalized metaphysical entity. Furthermore, Christians insist on the uniqueness of Christ as savior, while Buddhists generally deny any absolute necessity of such mediation. Still, both traditions contribute important correctives to modern nihilism and individualism. Buddhism challenges Christianity to embrace impermanence and interdependence more fully, freeing theology from rigid dogmatism. Christianity challenges Buddhism to engage more deeply with history, love, and the dimension of the personal. Christian theology and Buddhism, though arising in vastly different cultural and metaphysical horizons, share a profound concern for the transformation of human life in the face of suffering, finitude, and meaning. Their dialogue reveals not a synthesis that erases differences but a creative encounter that allows each to see more deeply into its own truth. Christianity reminds Buddhism of the power of love and historical embodiment; Buddhism reminds Christianity of the depth of emptiness and the radical letting-go that underlies spiritual awakening. In their conversation, both traditions contribute to a richer vision of human existence—one rooted in compassion, humility, and the mystery of the ultimate.

The universal success of The God of Small Things and the exuberant outburst of Salman Rushdie on ‘regional’ Indian writing call for a dispassionate approach to the genesis of Indo-English writing, nay, all Indian writing. Let us first propitiate the ‘God of Small Things’ before we turn our attention to the ‘Satan of Verses’

As Arundhati Roy’s success is of historical magnitude, it would be in order to follow the Gibbonian track to seek its causes. To this enquiry an obvious but satisfactory answer may be returned|: that it was owing to the newness of ‘The God o Small things’, exemplifies by the peculiar and pixilated use of the language to weave a sensuous story in a sinusoidal fashion, and the magical power of the narration, repetitions notwithstanding, that enthralls the reader throughout. But as truth and reason seldom find so favorable a reception in the world, and as the wisdom of Providence frequently condescends to use passion of the human heart, and the general circumstances of mankind, as instruments to execute its purpose. We may still be permitted, though with becoming submission to ask, not indeed what were the first, but what were the secondary causes, to borrow from Gibbon, of the unprecedented success of The God o Small Things, it will, perhaps, appear that it was most effectually favored by the three following causes. 1. The Indo-Christian ambience of the subject 2. The extraordinary hype bestowed upon it in a sustained manner, 3. The glamour and intelligence of its author.

As the second is widely felt, and the third truly perceived, it is the first of the secondary causes that needs to be delved into at some length for a general understanding. While ‘The God of Small Things’ is selling in six figures in  The States, the other two most publicized faces of |Indo-Anglican writing, Salman Rushdie and Vikram Seth, reportedly, have come a cropper there. The reason, perhaps, is all too apparent on appraisal, notwithstanding the relative merits of their works. Rushdie’s writings are about Indo-Muslim ethos, while Seth’s ‘Suitable Boy’ is in essence Indo-Hindu, and both of which are alien to the American cultural mindset. On the other hand, the Christian experience conveyed in Roy’s book, abetted in the exotic Indian setting, could vibe well with the American cultural consciousness that helped it to position itself, for months on, on The New York Times Best Seller List. For the very same reason, perhaps, the book got patronized, in translations, in many European countries as well.

However, the culture-literary scene in England, where Rushdie and Seth too sell well, not to speak of Roy, is altogether different. Owing to historical causes, the British and privy to the Indo-Hindu as well as Indo-Muslim socio-cultural nuances, and for nostalgic reasons tend to condescend to patronize Indo literary products packaged with the right kind of market mix.

This inherent anomaly of Indo-English writing seems to have been grasped by many an aspiring writer to stay afloat in the treacherous literary waters. One feels constrained, so it appears, to pave hi literary way to the Western markets over the trans-continental route by transplanting assorted alien characters, for no rhyme save for a reason, in the Indian social sub-soil. But in spite of this promising recipe, or perhaps, because of it, most of the fare turns out to be stale literary kichdi. Most of this effort seems to lack conviction as superficial alien pegs are sought to be placed I soulless holes of the shallow native soil. Paradoxically, this compulsion occasioned the wastage of much Indian literary talent. Besides; the formula in most cases, failed to click in the West leaving many a hopeful stuck.

This is where Arundhati Roy scores. Being a Syrian Christian herself, she instinctively captured the ambience of her community ethos, and artfully crafted the East-West equations, albeit Christian, to make The God of Small Things refreshingly appealing, and eminently readable, to one and all in India, and the world over.

What about the compulsions and quality of the Indian regional writing?” the prose writing –both fiction and non-fiction-created I this period (post-independence) by Indian writers working in English is proving to be a stronger and more important body of work that most of what has been produced in the 16 ‘official languages’ of India, the so-called ‘vernacular languages’, during the same time. Thus spake Salman Rushdie, ruffling many a vernacular feather, and occasioning much regional breast beating. And the decibel levels of the retaliatory counter-trumpeting that followed could have made Rushdie more sleepless than the fear of the fatwa ever did earlier. To be fair to Rushdie, he did concede that he came to this conclusion based on his reading of the available body of translations, which obviously failed to inspire.

Why single our Rushdie when Naipaul is not flattering either. In ‘An Area of Darkness’, he wrote- |”the feeling is widespread that, whatever English might have done for Tolstoy, it can never do justice to India ‘language’ writers. This is possible: what I read of them in translation did not encourage me to read more. Premchand turned out to be minor fabulist. Other writers quickly fatigued me with their assertions that poverty was sad, that death was sad. Many of the modern short stories were only refurnished folk tales…’ can there be smoke without fire, or are these two highly successful and decorated writers jealous of their poor vernacular cousins to insinuate in like manner? But before we go into that, we should have a look at the other side of the coin as well. |U>R. Ananthamurthy, President, Sahitya Academy, sounds eminently reasonable when he states: “that no Indian writer in any of the languages can assume to know what is happening in the Indian languages. Rushdie does not even live in India. How can he make such an enormous assumption?”

But would human curiosity leave the issue at that so stoically? Doubtful, given the human propensity for comparison. Why, for that matter, don’t we come across people who claim their language is the best evolved, ad that their literature is better? It does not stop at that either: endless arguments ensure among the literati of the same like about the perceived merit of some writers over the others of their own language. Can one deny such debates ensuring literary introspection besides improving human understanding? By being privy to the varied experiences of the people of our vast lad, all Indians should stand to gain intellectually. And the only way out for effecting inter-linguistic cultural interaction is to bring all the noteworthy works in Indian regional languages into the English mainstream through translations. This enables the worth of the composite Indian writing to be judged on a single platform, by us as well as by others. But in the solution seems to lie the problem itself.

It has been, more or less, accepted, even by the protagonists of the regional language pre-eminence, that the available quality of the translations is woefully inadequate, for most part, robbing the Preston beauty of the originals. There is another school of thought that the real taste o the regional works cannot be captured in English translations owing to their unique linguistic flavor. First, let us turn to the alleged poor quality of the translations. Assuming the translators at work are novices, who are unable to capture the nuances of the original regional masterpieces, why should the professionals be shying away from the calling? For sure, there would be sufficient number of well read professionals capable of experiencing the nuances of the regional masterpieces, why should the professionals be shying away from the calling? For sure, there would be sufficient number of well-read professionals capable of experiencing the nuances of the regional works, who could also have been exposed to the intricacies of English, in all regions, to run out competent translations. What could be preventing these learned bi-linguists from bring the masterpieces of their mother tongues to the international like light? Besides attending to the patriotic calling, there would be chance too to make a name for themselves, if not money, in the process. But this, as alleged by many, is not happening. But why? Could it be possible that those who savored the best of world literature while acquiring mastery over English find the native stuff unsavour? It would serve well the regionalists to open channels with their bi-linguists, who hold the international literary barometers, to exchange notes, and then to update their efforts if necessary. Till then Rushdie will get away by default.

About the untranslatability of some of the vernacular works. The exponents of this theory, without their realizing it, may be admitting to the queer nature of such works in regional languages. If some works appeal solely for their unique vernacular glitter, which obviously does not lend itself for translation, then they deserve to remain where they are, for the greatness of world literature owes itself to substance in the main.

But where will all this lead Indian literature to? Shall it rest on the laurels of small things for all time to come. Going by the potential of our diverse cultural backdrop, to inspire varied literary expressions. India should, one day, be the land of a thousand classics. But to realize the dream there seems to be a need for the change of attitudes- of the writers, of the publishers and, of course, of the reading public. Firstly, our writers should weave ‘modern’ stories around our varied cultural canvas, than seeking worn-out western crutches as props, to explore true |Indian fallibilities and possibilities. When asked to buy, as of now, the Indian readers may say there is nothing inspiring, barring an odd ‘God of Small Things’ for them to venture into the arena of Indian creative writing. The vital links in the chain are the publishers who should consciously look for, and promote rue Indian experiences sans Western trespassing. It is only thus, in time, we may have our own Tolstoys and Zolas, who one day could trod the world literary scene as colossuses, and make India the land of a thousand classics.

Jonathan Livingston Seagull is a book by Richard Bach that tells the story of a seagull named Jonathan who is on a journey to perfect his flying skills. The book contains many spiritual themes and ideas, and readers may find similarities between its teachings and those of A Course In Miracles. Jonathan Livingston Seagull was written in 1970. This little manuscript became a New York Times bestseller. 

As a young gull, Johnathan did what every other gull did. All day, every day, he would fight other gulls to get the fish scraps thrown off the boats. As he grew older, he’d had enough, there must be a better way to live than this. He started practicing flying. Every day as he practiced more and more, he became quite fast. The other gulls thought he was very strange, and he became an outcast. This didn't matter to Johnathan, at all. He practiced wing trim, spin dives, tail dives and advanced aerodynamics for a bird. He broke the sound barrier and because of his great speed he could dive very deep and capture the best fish. He could also fly very high for tasty insects. He lived to a ripe old age and one day a baby gull flew into his path. He swerved and flew into a cliff at a very high speed. He died. Next, the Great Gull was standing beside him and said, “Well Johnathan, your method of leaving time was a little abrupt, let's continue your training.” He reached the point of thinking of being somewhere and instantly he was there. 

This is my take on this beautiful story.  All of his life, Johnathan strove to achieve perfection in flight. Because of his dedication, he ate better and lived better than all the other gulls. I happen to be a Christian, and I feel this is analogous to a Christian’s life. A little side note, I am a Christian of a different color. I don’t believe Jesus died for my sin to save me from an eternal hell which does not exist. I have and continue to live my life by the standards he set. He lived a perfect life. His only enemies were the religious hierarchy. He was caring, kind, generous, truthful, helpful, forgiving, honest and loving. As we strive to achieve perfection in these traits, we, like Johnathan, live better. If everyone alive today, all 8 billion of us, would simply live by, “Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.”; here's what would happen. We would have no more wars, prisons, poverty, crime, or homelessness. We would have no need for locks or passwords. Doing just that, think about it, it's true.  Bob

Riverside.fm USA-Author Interview of Dr. Mantri Pragada Markandeyulu, Hyderabad (India) 8 July 2023

Literary Field Research on

WORDS, WORDS, WORDS

NON-LINGUISTIC LANGUAGE is generally mingled and used in other languages by many people, when they are at other languages spoken places.

Even the foreigner's languages are quite often mingled with other languages due to expression of words and speaking problem People who live in State/Country borders, the impact of mingled or clubbed languages used will be high and is very often observed. 

European languages like Italian, Russian, Spanish, Greek, Latin, are sometimes inter and intra-mingled and like that in Indian Languages, Sanskrit, Pali, Devangari, Dravida, Arabic, Parsi words are mostly mingled and inter & intra-connected while speaking and writing. In the present globalization scenario, many words of different country's languages are used very often so that people are able to understand what the other person is saying.

People like motherland and mother tongue language, respect their language and shower affection on their local language and would like to express their feeling while speaking/writing. This is called Sahityam, which speaks of literary expertise in respective living literary areas.

The language spoken/written indicates people’s culture and national integration.

The word makes magic in our lives. The love, passion fashion, mission, relation etc will be in order, when we use words properly, sensibly and tactfully.

Languages are made to use accordingly to the situation using proper proverbs, quotations, phrases, short stories, examples, experiences to give effective suggestions when people in problems will definitely give solace when you work with proper modulation. 

It gives more impact and importance to the situation.

When you want to give the information, you should use words properly and with firm voice. 

Use minimum words and try to convey the message. 

Lengthy and deviated conversation weakens the purpose.

They may lose the interest to get information or suggestions. 

All the time we can not practice the type of procedure.

By seeing the situation, we can change phrases, quotations, proverbs make the conversation very interesting and effective.

A balanced positive talk with durable pleasant positive vibration makes the other person feel like spending more time in your company.

A kind of bond will be created.

We should use the language with proper pitch and it should depict your feelings, emotions, reactions and your moods.

Accordingly, the other person should understand and react into the situation.

The language or the words should convey the message correctly without confusion.

Practicing this usage of words is very easy.

Keep the mind cool and clear in your thoughts.

Be firm when you want to convey the message. 

Do not get confused when others disturb you.

While you talk with others, words usage should be limited.

When you put it on the paper it can convey the message properly and completely with balanced good expression.

Indian languages have so many appropriate, expressive words.

We can play with the words to convey any impression, expression, emotion, reaction or feeling and son on.

But think with the mind, heart and soul.

Think in a positive way and deliver with proper words.

People should remember and think of you like a human being.

Another important aspect which could change and transform your life in a better way by increasing your influence and improving your relationship and lead to the road of success depends on using the words carefully while speaking to others.

The words are very important and powerful tools and it all depends on how you use these words.

As explained in earlier lectures, these words carry tremendous energy of your strong intent or will.

The energy of confidence, the energy of your assertiveness and these words which are nothing but sounds carry a very powerful magnetic field which is very intelligent.

When these words are spoken with 100 percent pure intent, honesty, conviction etc of the positive energies, it will affect the magnetic field of listener or listeners.

Every human being, being a magnetic will have his own magnetic field which is invisible and forms a circle around the body.

When we give speech in the form of words of magnetic sounds, it touches the magnetic field of listeners and in physics one reaction takes place which is called as inductance. 

Here, when they are meeting at one point, there will be an exchange of energies and these energies carry your thoughts, your suggestions, your ideas your concepts. 

If your thoughts are full of inner conviction, honesty, pure in nature, will definitely influence the magnetic fields of listener in a very positive way and all will be attracted towards how you and will be more receptive.

While addressing, you should also follow certain tactical steps which we have already described in various prerequisites like change your voice i.e., modulating your voice ups & downs will also have a very good positive impact on others.

This was proved by the scientists working at NASA.

Vedas are recited with a very specific and particular modulation of voice.

When you speak this way, sending the messages in the form of mantras create a very magnetic field which will influence the magnetic fields offers and brings about a positive reaction and response.

Hence, try to culture your voice and you can practice at home, learn how to modulate the voice, when to take the voice up, when to take the voice down.

But one thing, use words in a very proper way.

They should be very polite and very appealing.

I also give lot of importance to the usage of words and nothing but words, because the words are the only powerful tools of the communication.

If the words are not there, there is no communication and when there is no communication there is evolution.

Hence, try to use words very sparingly and talk only when you required.

Thus, you can conserve lot of inner energy.

One small wrongly used word will spoil the entire interview or inter-personal relationship.

Hence, always practice and practice your presentation at home.

One very well-known marketing or a director of a very big pharmaceutical company who had graduated from the Business School of Harvard University had the habit of always doing the presentation all alone much before the actual meeting begins. 

I had seen lot of seniors and highly successful people plan much before and list out things on a piece of paper, make rehearsals, before the actual presentation and achieved tremendous success.

Only one word about which most of the people, mostly the ‘teenagers do not understand, but use vey frequently the word as “individuality”.

Without knowing the deeper meaning of this word, it is misused, misunderstood and misinterpreted by most of the people.

A teenage boy or a girl when the elder’s comment about their dressing code, they react that they had their own individuality, they had their own freedom to wear what they would like to wear. 

This they call as individuality. 

According to them individuality means to have their own freedom starting from the dressing code, their physical appearance, their conscious, their ideas, they germ all these in one single capsule called individuality.

But, one thing they forget is all these impressions, ideas; concepts are formed by watching around their environments.

The type of movies now-a-days they see, the type of magazines, the type of advertisements, the type of concepts they are highly influenced by the surrounding environment.

Even the greatest scientists they confirm those factors with more than genetic effect, the environmental effect works on the personality of the human beings.

Unfortunately, the reading hobby has come down and the type of books available in the market they will never help in the self-development of the individual persons. 

The idea, the concept or the personality trades of the writers are imposed on the young readers who could not differentiate between what was required for their personality development, but on the contrary their emotions are easily influenced. 

As discussed in earlier lectures, the human beings could be stimulated or through their emotions rather than their intellect or the rational thinking. 

The same thing here, it is applied by the producers, directors, actresses and the politicians, the entire environment does not give practical meaning for life.

They always take you in higher up in the fantasies in the dream world.

They always take you away from the reality.

That is the reason most of the teenagers are frustrated and before they realize their potentials, most of them are becoming addicted to alcohol. 

Most of celebrities are having depression, frustration, anxiety, and neurosis and are terminating their lives.

The reason is very simple. It is nothing but the influence of the external factor is influencing your inner personality.

Right from the child-hood, your college atmosphere, the school atmosphere, the ragging by the senior students, in the most uncivilized ways and then the pictures you see, the books reading, the magazines you are reading and the type of friends and the type of movies, all these are making the artificial personality.

Earlier, the scientists used to behave with the genetic influence would be more on the personality trade, but the recent studies have proved that the environment influence is greater than the genetic influence.

Now-a-days, the entire generation is under the influence of the surrounding environment. 

Thus, the real potentials are masked by the artificial real personality trades.

There is always a conflict between the natural personality trades and the acquired personality trades from the surrounding environments and the social conditions. 

That is the reason the teenagers are unable to resolve the inner conflicts, one is natural and the other one is unnatural.

This is the reason most of the youngsters are terminating their lives before realizing the potentials.

The influencing personalities like the cinema stars both actresses and actors are super imposing on the natural personality trades of the youngsters mostly the teenagers.

That is how they lost their own hidden potentials and talents.

Mostly, they have become imitators than originators.

They are capable of producing and contributing so many useful things to the entire world, but unfortunately as informed earlier, that their own personality is being suppressed as they imitate the personality trades of the actors and actresses. 

The quality of the movies, of late, has come down with lower and lower moralities.

Actually, there are no moralities at all in the movies. 

The visual impact is always more influencing and that is what happening at this time and even the advertisements are misleading.

The celebrities do not care for the welfare of the society and for the sake of money, even promote the cheapest products.

The common people will imitate the same thing like smoking cigarettes or using sub-standard products since their beloved heroes advertise.

Thus, unfortunately, the present youth is embracing the un-useful personality trades of the people whose contribution to the society is less than zero.

At least, time has come for the present youth.

This is a wake-up call. Don’t be an imitator. You have tremendous potential.

Try to imitate patriots, the greatest people who have contributed to the society and to the common people of this world.

Also, try to logically analyse what is the meaning of individuality.

You cannot have your own freedom when you are living in a society.

For example, you are studying in a particular school and the school decides the uniform which could be standard for all the students and if you rebel and refuse to wear because there your individuality was hurt, then you will be losing the opportunity of studying in the school along with other students. 

Similarly, if you refuse to follow the dress code in an organization, then you will not get a job.

The present youth of India have got great potentials to develop their own personality instead of being an imposter.

Spend time qualitatively. 

The life is a gift from the God and use the life for the betterment of the society.

Expand your consciousness and live life independently with your own inborn personality trades.

Now, we are dealing with some of the negative energies.

I don’t wish to call them as prerequisites. 

Now-a-days, the entire world is suffering from one disorder or disease called depression or frustration. 

These two are negative energies, but, in my view and frustration are very common.

There is nothing negativity in these energies.

Even the most successful people when they were interviewed confessed that they have also passed different phases in life, the negative energies like depression, anxiety, and frustration.

Most of them could come out from these energies within short span of time.

When a human being is sick immediately the doctor will advise some pathological test.

The patient will be weak, he will have high temperature, he will not have appetite and the blood report reveals there was a presence of bacteria and increased number of WB cells which forms the defensive mechanism of the human body.

Similarly, depression is also a mental action to an inflection.

This is very common and natural. 

Every human being, at one stage or the other will have to pass through these depressions, frustrations, anxiety and lot of other negative energies.

But only thing is that this depression we should not analyse it to survive for a long time.

So, what is the best way to combat this depression or anxiety? 

Even in my case, I had depressions and frustrations on many occasions.

But I allow it to exist for not more than 15 minutes. 

What I do is that, I immediately change my clothing, I take fresh bath, sing a song and whistle the song, and I think all positive achievements in the life and I just go out for a walk, maybe I go to restaurant, have snacks, tea and relax myself. 

The depression has gone within 15 minutes.

Whenever you undergo depression or a frustration, just think of the best moment you had in your life and think all your best achievements in your life.

Every human being is born with tremendous potential and is capable of doing many greater things. 

Unfortunately, because of environmental influence one gets depression.

But he starts remembering his positive achievements and how he had achieved set goals in his life and how he was successful in different fields, he goes to the past and thinks about the happiest moments, the energy of depression will be dissolved and disintegrated immediately.

When you start thinking off your own achievements slowly you gain confidence and when you gain confidence the depression cannot survive in the company of confidence. 

I am once again repeatedly assuring and emphasizing that every human being including the most successful people in the world have passed this depression, anxiety, frustration and disappointments and negative energies. 

But the great quality they had is all are optimistic and hopeful for their future and constantly put forth their efforts.

Similarly, even a common man can become a celebrity or could become potential contributor for the good cause of the society.

For God’s sake, do not to be worried or scared about depression, frustration and they are the part of the life.

Sometimes, the depression will stimulate self confidence in most of the people who have positive thinking. 

This is also a feedback mechanism.

If Mahatma Gandhi was not insulted and not thrown out of the compartment and abused, he would have not become a great leader.

Similarly, you can see the life history of great people, all negative situations, and negative events made them very strong.

Then why you can’t? You can also become and achieve greater things in your life. Never give up hopes always live with hopes. 

After the storm, there is always calm. After the sunshine there are showers of rain.

I once again appeal to all the youngsters, kindly think that you are also made by the God, and the God’s creation there are no clause.

Similarly, in you there is no clause, you are born to do greater things.

You are born to achieve so many things. 

You are born to contribute to the society many good things.

Do not give up.

Wait and wait, try and try, you will definitely achieve your respective goals.

There are so many books which are written on Human Management.

But these books are not necessary to be appropriate in all the situations. 

The human beings are different throughout the world because of their cultures, their habits, and their customs.

What is applicable in India may not be applicable in other foreign countries like African continent or in European countries.

These books will only help to a certain extent.

What you need is your own analysis, or own logical deductions.

Whenever there are failures take some time, analyse and immediately take remedial measures. 

Constantly you have to do self-analysis that is the best way managing the human beings rather than reading the books and applying the same.

The only exceptions in some of the books, which discuss the basic psychological trades, are very useful.

The Upanishads are the best human management books because they have discussed the human personality trades in depth.

As a Training Manager, I read only few books on human management and was not convinced except some books which deal with the human psychology.

I have given lot of examples from my own experience under this title The Game of Life.

Basically, if you want to be successful you have to take lot of interest in other human beings.

By reading books, you are not able to achieve anything.

By reading the human beings in your own practical way, you would understand them and then when you apply the set principles definitely you will be more successful.

The same law is not applicable to every case of human beings.

You need to change your strategies in the same interview many times.

When the customer is closing the door your approach, you need to open another door. When closes that door, try to open another door.

In between these spaces, you should be able to assess the personality of the other human being and then open the door very wide. 

I have tested all these in my personal.

Hence my humble request that you read more and more about human beings’ personality and have your own experience.

Your own experience is the best teacher and the best guide to you.

It does not mean that you should not read other books, but you can read other books.

I try my best to list out all the important prerequisites, but there are many more that you need to find out for yourself.

It is also equally difficult thing for me to write-down lot of other training methods or techniques which could consume volumes and volumes and it would not be appropriate to put those things in our website.

However, those who are interested they van contact me on my contact phone.

Life is an interesting game.

Take lot of interest involving you.

Play the game according to the rules & regulations and improve the skills and enjoy yourself.

=========