Persian Literature

Sohrab and Rustum

(Matthew Arnold)

Sohrab and Rustum was written in the early1850s in England. It was set in ancient Persia. Its text is quite short for an epic prose. A contemporary writer classified it as an epyllion, a narrative poem usually presenting an episode from the hero’s past and resembling an epic but much briefer and more limited. It has 892 lines without subdivisions.

The young Sohrab was the fruit of one of Rustum’s early amours. He had left his mother, and sought fame under the banners of Afrasiab, whose armies he commanded, and soon obtained renown beyond that of all contemporary heroes but his father.  Alothough a Persian, Aohrab has taken service in the army of Afrasiab, King of Tartars. He had carried death and dismay into the ranks of the Persians, and had terrified the boldest warriors of that country, before Rustum encountered him, which at last that hero resolved to do, under a feigned name.

They met three times. The first time they ceased combat by mutual consent, though Sohrab had the advantage; the second, the youth obtained a victory, but spared life of his adversary, still ignorant of the fact that the older warrior was in fact his father; the third was fatal to Sohrab, who, when writhing in the pangs of death, warned his conqueror to shun the vengeance that is inspired by parental woes, and bade him dread the rage of the mighty Rustum, who must soon learn that he had slain his son Sohrab. Using the classical model of the in medias res opening, the writer did not elaborate on those previous encounters and elected to begin with the third. The writer rendered the encampment and the battlefield on the shores of the River Oxus “epic” in quality and scale.

Sohrab’s death, were as death to the aged hero; and when he recovered from a trance, he called in despair for proofs of what Sohrab had said. The afflicted and dying youth tore open his mail, and showed his father a seal which his mother had placed on his arm when she discovered to him the secret of his birth, and bade him seek his father. The sight of his own signet rendered Rustum quite frantic; he cursed himself, attempting to put an end to his existence, and was only prevented by the efforts of his expiring son. After Sohrab’s death, he burnt his tents and all his worldy possessions, and carried the corpse to Seistan, where it was interred; the army of Turan was, agreeable to the last request of Sohrab, permitted to cross the Oxus unmolested. The numerous geographic references in the story intended to create grandeur for the setting of the action.

It may seem improbable that Rustum and Sohrab did not know that they are relatives. But it was provided in the story that Rustum could have no idea his son was in existence. The mother of Sohrab had written to him her child was a daughter, fearing to lose her darling infant if she revealed the truth; and Rustum, as before stated, fought under a feigned name, a usage not uncommon in the chivalrous combats of those days.

The final paragraph of the prose creates a feeling of quiet peace and reassurance after the tragedy, achieved partly on a symbolic level by the suggestion that the Oxus stands for the stream of human life, which begins with the bright strength of youth.  It has to endure its potentialities and foiled its hopes, but finally reaches the luminous home.
The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam
 
            The Rubaiyat is a collection of poems attributed to Persian mathematician and astronomer Omar Khayyam.  Rubaiyat means quatrains or verses of four lines.           

Omar Khayyam is believed to have composed somewhere between 200 and 600 Rubaiyat or quatrains. Some are known to be authentic and are attributed to him, while others seem to be combinations or corruption of his poetry, and whose origins are more dubious.

The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam is among the few masterpieces that have been translated into most languages, including English, French, German, Italian, Russian, Chinese, Hindi, Arabic, and Urdu.

The most famous translation of the Rubaiyat from Farsi into English was undertaken in 1859 by Edward J. Fitzgerald. It appears that in many of his translations, he has combined a few of the Rubaiyat to compose one, and sometimes it is difficult to trace and correspond the original to the translated version. However, he has tried his utmost to adhere to the spirit of the original poetry.

 
The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ,

Moves on: nor all your Piety nor Wit

Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line,

Nor all your Tears wash out a Word of it.

 

            The Supreme Court of the Philippines quoted this verse when it junked the election protest of defeated presidential candidate Fernando Poe, Jr. against Philippine President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo.  It simply means that no matter how much we debate, engage or oppose, some things that have been done cannot be undone.  As for the cited case, it was used to convey the message that it would be futile to discuss more about the outcome of the election since FPJ is already dead. 

 

And if the Wine you drink, the Lip you press,

End in Nothing, all Things end in – Yes-

Then fancy while Thou art, Thou art but what

Thou shalt be – Nothing—Thou shalt not be less.

In life, we have to devote ourselves to joy and love.  We have to behold the beauty of the world.  It can be summed up to mean that we should live our life to the fullest because this life is only temporary.


Myself when young did eagerly frequent
Doctor and Saint, and heard great Argument
About it and about: but evermore
Came out by the same Door as in I went.

When we were younger, we went to school and learned from our teachers. As we grow older and more knowledgeable, we begin to question what the truth is—if there is truth to what we were taught in our early years. Then we begin to realize that we are still far from the truth so we tend to be skeptical in a way that we discover the sad truth that not all the things we believed in is true.

Gandhi: The Great Soul

A brave person with only his knowledge and keen wit as his weapon – that is Mahatma Gandhi. The film about his life is great as it showed the highlights of one of the greatest men of history. He was shown in the film as an Italian lawyer who became the famed leader of the Indian revolts against the British through his philosophy of non-violent protest. He was the pioneer and perfector of Satyagraha – the resistance of tyranny through mass civil disobedience strongly founded upon ahimsa or total non-violence – which led to Indian independence, and has inspired movements for civil rights and freedom across the world. He first employed his ideas of peaceful civil disobedience in the Indian community’s struggle for civil rights in South Africa. Upon his return to India, he organized poor farmers and labourers in India to protest oppressive laws made by the British. He led a nationwide campaign for the alleviation of the poor, liberation of Indian women, for brotherhood amongst communities of differing religions and ethnicity, for an end to untouchability and caste discrimination, and for the economic self-sufficiency of the nation, but above all for independence of India from foreign domination. Due to his acts, he was imprisoned for many years on numerous occasions in South Africa and India.

Throughout his life, Gandhi remained committed to non-violence and truth even in the most extreme situations. He set a good example on how it is to live simply and be self-sufficient by making his own clothes.  He abstained from food and water for long periods as a means of protest.

Satyagraha literally means insistence on truth. This is the philosophy Gandhi used in forcing an end to the British Raj. It was illustrated in the film in scenes where Gandhi was being tried for sedition and was asked for his defense statement. He admitted the truth that he is indeed guilty if it were the only way he could let them realize how he hated the British colonizers and his genuine desire to liberate India. He was not afraid to be jailed nor to be assaulted or even killed just to stand up for the truth he believes in – for the principles he advocated. Yet he did these in a way no man has ever did during his time – without violence. The doctrine of Satyagraha came to mean vindication of truth, not by infliction of suffering on the opponent but one’s own self. It is linked with the practices of civil disobedience and fasting. Gandhi believed that Satyagraha is a weapon of the strong; it admits of no violence under any circumstance whatever; and it ever insists upon truth.

The religious concept which is related to this non-violence and respect for all life is Ahimsa. It may be understood to mean that a person should not offend anybody, and harbor uncharitable thought, even in connection with those who consider your enemies. There are no enemies to a man who follows this doctrine. If you express your love—ahimsa—in such a manner that it impresses itself indelibly upon your so-called enemy, he must return that love.

Satyagraha and ahimsa are the convictions upon which Gandhi’s life and acts were based upon. He bravely faced his enemies – not even treating them as ones – with a half smile and a half grin on his face.
(more…)

Marital Infidelity… for a law student taking a college course

Leveling Men and Women on Marital Infidelity

Mr. Asawa had sexual intercourse with Ms. Dalaga. Knowing her husband’s unfaithfulness, Mrs. Asawa was able to find a new lover with whom she had sexual intercourse. Who are liable for a crime, if any?
This is an example of a typical question in a Criminal Law exam. It is plain to see that in the situation, the husband and the wife did the same thing – they had sexual intercourse with another person other than their own spouse. However, the answer to the question is that only Mrs. Asawa can be prosecuted for a crime – adultery – upon a complaint filed by Mr. Asawa. Mr. Asawa, on the other hand, is not liable for any crime at all. Yes, he did the same thing as his wife and both have been unfaithful to each other. Dura lex sed lex. The law may be harsh but, it is still the law. Laws, however, can be repealed.
The Revised Penal Code was enacted 1930, based on the penal laws of Spain. Some articles have already been repealed and amended (Agpalo). Some articles have become obsolete, but still remain in the Code (Reyes). Other articles still manifest the bias against women which our society today has started to eliminate.
Title Eleven, which enumerates the definitions and penalties of crimes against chastity, includes on its first chapter, the crimes of Adultery and Concubinage. A married woman who shall have sexual intercourse with someone other than her husband is guilty of adultery (Art.333 Revised Penal Code). As simple as that. Sexual intercourse and the identity of the other man are the only elements that need to be proved by the prosecution. Furthermore, a wife can be prosecuted for as many acts of sexual intercourse. On the other hand, the man who is prosecuted for concubinage should be proven to have kept a mistress in the conjugal dwelling or cohabited with her in any other place; the sexual intercourse of the infidel husband with another woman should be proved to have been under scandalous circumstances (Art. 334 RPC).
The very definitions of the crime are distinct. So in reality, there is no law punishing adultery on the part of the husband. The husband should be unashamed enough to let his paramour live in the family home or in any other place before he gets to be punished for his infidelity.
Article 919 (3) of the Civil Code of the Philippines further exhibits the discrimination reflected by the penal laws on adultery and concubinage. The article identifies sexual infidelity as one of the causes of disinheritance between spouses. It defines sexual infidelity as adultery for women and concubinage for men; this is, unmistakably, a double standard. Why it is that adultery is not considered sexual infidelity for men? The implication of this law is that wives are more prone to disinheritance than husbands. This reveals the pernicious discrimination against women that still afflicts our legal tradition and society.
Familiarity with laws on adultery and concubinage would leave a socially conscious individual wondering, “Are men and women really equal under Philippine law?” The legislator who aims to capture the female sector would typically answer that we are on our way to making ways to promote such equality. However, no law has yet been passed by our male-dominated law-making body regarding the inequality apparent in the law on concubinage and adultery.
The law, aside from being lenient on men’s infidelity, imposes stiffer penalties on unfaithful women. Adultery carries a penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods, equivalent to 8 years and 1 day to 12 years of imprisonment (Art. 333 RPC). A man guilty of Concubinage, on the other hand, is punished with prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods or 6 years and 1 day to 8 years of imprisonment (Art. 334 RPC).
The law on concubinage should be repealed and the law on adultery should be amended so as to include men. Consequently, both can be classified as “infidelity of the spouse”. This new law should impose the same penalties; the same elements would be required to be proved to establish the guilt of the offending spouse. This way, the discrimination and equality of men and women on family and social relation would subside.
Infidelity is the breaking of marital vows. In Philippine culture, infidelities or extramarital relationships range from casual relationships to the keeping of a querida or paramour. In Filipino marriages, the husband’s infidelity is a major concern. Male infidelity can be the most frequent reason for marital separation (internet source).
Adultery and concubinage are both acts of infidelity. Until men and women are made to suffer on the same grounds and the same penalty, the principle on gender equality embedded in our 1987 Constitution can never be fulfilled. The constitutional mandate that the state recognizes the role of women in nation building and the fundamental equality of men and women is not being fully upheld. Constitutional provisions are general and need implementing laws. After almost two decades, these implementing laws have yet to be passed.
With the equality provision of the Constitution as well as a number of significant laws that have been passed for the benefit of women, the Philippine Government has committed itself to the advancement of women. In spite of these small successes, so much more remains to be done before de facto equality for women is actualized. This includes the eradication of unfairness of laws, most especially penal laws, among women.
Why is it that a law such as this, directly dealing with family relations, which is very important in a predominantly Catholic society, has not been given much priority? Is it because of the double standard type of morality we have in our society? More men are engaged in extramarital relations. But a husband is less tolerant or less forgiving when his wife becomes unfaithful. This should not be reflected in our laws, though. What is customarily or conventionally accepted should not mean that it is right in the eyes of the law. Husbands and wives should never be tolerated, by the law, in any circumstance to commit acts of infidelity by being lenient with them. Thus the need for the consolidation of the adultery and concubinage laws into one single law – infidelity of the spouse.
Adultery, in its general definition, seemed more unconcealed, almost natural for husbands. Males commonly court and seek out their extra-marital female partners. This may be because there is actually no law punishing adultery or sexual infidelity of men. Females, however, tended to feel more guilty, keeping it a secret. Unlike the males who actively court, the females’ affair are more happenstance, situation-bound, such as meeting an old boyfriend, or being closely thrown together by circumstances.
The gender issue behind infidelity is well-entrenched in Philippine culture (internet source). The excuse given is that men are expected to be material providers or breadwinners. Pure and simple. Men only needs to work hard to provide and protect, give their lives to their work, find respite in their beers, and in many cases, in their women, and generally kept their hearts to themselves. Parenting is considered primarily a mother’s responsibility. So whatever happens to the marriage, which as a result, would affect the children, is left in the hands of the mother. The mother will tend to do anything to save the marriage, remain faithful despite her husband’s infidelity.
The burden, then, is on women. The tolerance of our laws on infidelity of husbands results in the continued increase of unfaithful husbands and eventually, legal separation cases. The emotional trauma inflicted on the “victim” wife is worse than the physical abuse. It results in humiliation, hurt, rejection and loss for the injured partner since it attacks the person’s self-worth and ego. But why is that the laws have stiffer penalties for female unfaithfuls?
Our society seems to still consider many gender problems as trivial and marginal. This has to change. A small step such as amending the law on adultery and repealing the law on concubinage could count. This legal framework for women is quite impressive but the challenges of implementation and cultural shift remains. The interplay of culture and institutions like the bureaucracy, political offices, and the church makes the discourse on gender issues very animated and usually polarized.
All forms of discrimination against women should be eliminated through social and legislative reforms. There should be a general gender perspective in all legislation, public policies, programs and projects. The problems of enforcement and implementation may be many but popularizing them so that they become tools of empowerment could elucidate these problems. Information campaigns and dissemination mechanisms to promote and explain the workings of these laws need to be strengthened. Moreover, there is some resistance to the actual implementation of these laws because of deep-seated sexist attitudes and practices. Given this resistance, it has been difficult for bills on women to be enacted.
It is true that more is required than legislation. We cannot legislate a change in culture. The inequality of men and women is deeply embedded not just in our laws but in our everyday lives. Changing this is a slow process that requires the education as well as the economic and political empowerment of women as well as men. It’s a long road, but we will get there. We have to take a step. Reduce discrimination by making men and women suffer the same for their infidelities. Eliminate the distinction between adultery and concubinage for both are just acts of infidelity

The Starbucks Experience: My Way of Explaining it

I chanced upon a website – www.ihatestarbucks.com – where people from all over America rant about their abhorrence towards Starbucks. Then I thought to myself, “If there would be a www.ilovestarbucks.com, a Filipino would have been its web designer and Filipinos would flood its boards about their fascinations with Starbucks.”
The “Starbucks experience” is distinctively perceived and enjoyed by Filipinos. We had allowed Starbucks to transcend such time and space. Though Starbucks is primarily foreign, it has undergone the process of “indigenization”. This process deals with the link of external influences and our own culture. Starbucks, a Seattle-based company had its way of blending with the Filipino culture. This is why Starbucks became popular among Filipinos. The ambiance, the customers, the baristas’ performance, the taste of the coffee and the architecture of Starbucks has an impact on the whole Starbucks experience. These features reflect the Filipino culture.
The Starbucks experience here in the Philippines can be described as “masarap”. The term, however, is not confined to taste. Our culture is very rich and we are keen to nuances. We are very particular of the quality that points to an inherent element that arouses happiness, fulfillment, and thrill. This is perceived by differentiation, by contrasts and comparisons of inherent distinctiveness of food or event that becomes part of the totality of the experience.
Since 1997, when the first retail location was put up in Makati, the country’s leading financial district, the cafés have multiplied and have become ubiquitous in Metro Manila. These can be found inside malls, near the big universities and colleges, and near gimmick places. We can easily find a Starbucks Coffee retail outlet in Metro Manila. We could go to one depending on our purpose. We drink Starbucks in outlets within the malls after a long tiring day of window shopping to refresh ourselves with iced coffee.
The Starbucks outlets are remarkably located in areas where their target customers hang around. The outlets near the universities and colleges are for those students who are not comfortable enough to cram in their own dormitories or apartments and who need to keep themselves awake to study. Mall outlets are for teenagers who go to malls in the afternoon because they are not yet allowed to stay out at night. For those who are already licensed to party and drink all night, Starbucks has become an extension of the gimmick places where they could drink coffee to overcome the effects alcohol and keep them awake on their ride home.
The kinds of people differ inside each Strabucks outlet, the baristas are different, and the couches, too. However, each outlet has been known to have constant patrons – students of UP Diliman and Ateneo go to the Katipunan branch, while the La Sallians go to Vito Cruz, UP Manila students and Bedans go to UN branch, Makati yuppies go to 6750, and the gimikeros hang out in the outlets in Malate, Libis, Timog and Alabang.
The customers who have frequented the outlets too much, they already have their own space – it may be the couch they find comfortable enough to stimulate them to study, or the al fresco seats where they’ve puffed a number of cigarettes and where they’ve seen a number of cute passers-by. Filipinos may call it their “own” space. Space is merely an expanse but it acquires a human feature once it has been claimed for one’s own use – to stay, sit, and take pleasure in. The transformation becomes cultural and becomes a part of that person, his ways, his experience. Each space, in every little way, provides a different experience.
Other people though go to Starbucks to “tambay” or pass time off while hanging out with friends. Filipinos are used to surrendering their time for the enrichment of their social relations. This is the consequence of a society whose organizational structures contain “ego-centered networks” We usually don’t care about time. A cup of coffee that could be sipped for less than a minute at home can take us hours to consume in Starbucks. We think only of the moment and the amount of money as the givens in which we exist and we master such givens up to the highest extent that we can. We believe that it is really the only way to taste the flavors of life. As a result, Starbucks stores are usually full of people, relishing the cool air-conditioned breeze, relaxing on the cushioned seats and couches to make the most out of their Starbucks expenses.
One of the most important parts of the experience is of course, the element of drinking. Why else would a typical Filipino spend almost or more than a hundred pesos for coffee? Starbucks must really taste good. Taste prevails in our choice of drinks. But it is not all taste. Filipinos are lovers of anything “masarap.” One of the main domains of our appetite is food. We love tasting new foods and drinks. Filipinos have long been instant coffee drinkers and have long been limited to drinking warm coffee. The varieties of Starbucks cold drinks gave them the chance to experience something innovative.
The hot beverages in Starbucks are not that popular. Starbucks offers drinks made of a Filipino variety of coffee, grown in our own lands, to promote our very own coffee culture. This, however, is not that popular among Filipinos. A Filipino favorite would be mocha Frapuccino topped with whipped cream, which Filipinos often mistake for ice cream, much like the ones on top of our traditional cold dessert, the halu-halo.
The usual customers of Starbucks range from the middle class to the upper class because of the price of their products. A 150 peso average expense for coffee is quite luxurious as compared to an instant coffee that ordinarily costs 11 pesos only. The customers apparently choose to spend more because of the perks they could get from it. It is evident that those who come from the same classes feel most secure among people from the same status; there is immediately the same bond of language, food and preferences. The upper class would definitely prefer staying in Starbucks than spend time in fast-food chains where the majority of the people are not of the same class. Conversely, the middle class people feel they are part of the upper class as they hang out in Starbucks. The experience adds up to the feeling of economic well being because otherwise, one has no other business inside the store other than visiting the comfort rooms or drinking water readily available to anyone.
Starbucks has been a gathering place that could be described as something in between formal and informal. It is a place formal enough for a date yet one could dress down and be more relaxed. Starbucks has become, apart from being a café, a gathering place. Filipinos tend to kompol-kompol or form clusters. Group formations are based on affinity, on friendship, on common membership in group, and lastly on issues. Filipinos rarely go to Starbucks alone. However, if one goes there alone, it is not anymore surprising to see familiar faces around and share tables with them. It’s like a networking of relationships, which is an important component of Philippine life. Filipinos accomplish this with whatever resources and interests are available to them. In this case, Starbucks is used as a vehicle for widening one’s social networks.
Each Starbucks store is worth–visiting because each is unique in its own way unlike fast-food joints that are standardized. Real differences have been made from one location to another – not just in size, shape and furnishings, but in the experience you get from each. This is clearly part of the company’s formula: unlike Jollibee, venturing into a Starbucks you haven’t tried before offers the hint of adventure.
Starbucks puts a double shot of hometown flavor into every store. It has different architectural designs for each country. Culture, of course, is taken into consideration in devising one. In the Philippines, coffee bars that feel grounded in the scene lure Filipinos to hang out for a wide spectrum of reasons, and that somehow make us think “Starbucks” for refreshment or conversation. A distinctive feature would be its being inter, intra-connected with other spaces as the window walls connect the inside from the al fresco. The non-smoking friends usually stay inside while the others prefer the outside seating, but the sharp division between the indoor and outdoor is blurred. In such a way, the life of the store is integrated with the street and vicinity, literally and symbolically. The manongs and manangs selling cigarettes are, in one way or another, becomes part of the whole experience.
Parts of the experience too, are the baristas. A barista’s job typically comes down to blending the coffee with the right flavoring. The baristas are entitled to a discount on all drinks, a free bag of roasted coffee beans every week, and two coffees for their shift each day. Baristas here in the Philippines are college-graduates, often good-looking, and sometimes English-speaking. They are more presentable and pleasing to deal with unlike other waiters or crews in restaurants and fast-food chains. They cheerfully greet the customers and ask their orders while maintaining sincere-looking smiles on their face. They get personal with the customers by asking their nicknames and calling them to hand in their ordered drinks. They usually bid jolly farewells as the customers go to their tables. This must be the reason why Filipinos are drawn to Starbucks against its rivals – its near maniacal pursuit of providing customers a friendly and efficient buying experience. Once in a while, it is commonplace for Filipinos to give out weird names so that the baristas would amusingly call out “For Ever!” or “For Bearance!” Even this simple yet unique Filipino humor makes the Starbucks experience worthwhile.
Filipinos’ appreciation is something non-material; “we value the intangibility of the tangible”. This is how we enjoy Starbucks. We enjoy being there. We enjoy the company we are with while we are there. We enjoy the individuality of Starbucks and the individuality we get from it. We enjoy the sentiments and sensations of each moment spent there.
The Starbucks experience and our fascination for it may be rooted to our own culture and value system. For the most part, it is foreign but our culture had its way of transforming it into something only we could enjoy this way.