The past is past and cannot be brought back. But, some past events throw useful insights on the present. I recollect past events to connect them with present happenings.
My recollection goes back to the early 1960s when I was in my early teens and in Tirunelveli. Our neighbour, Swaminathan, was a kumastha (clerk) to a prominent lawyer. He studied up to SSLC, but that qualification was enough for him to maintain civil law points in his finger tips. For the double-degree holder lawyer, he was the guide, colleague and a friend. He was an affectionate son to his widowed mother, loving husband to his smart wife and strict father to his four children, and a good friend for many.
Swaminathan’s mother and wife used to argue at times and both differed in terms of opinions and outlook. If any wrong or unwanted incident happened anywhere, his mother would give an explanation and reach a conclusion claiming “all are bad only”. His wife would disagree and give a different version, altering the negative opinion and saying “all are good only”.
The duo’s differing opinions was never compromised. At times, the matter was brought to Swaminathan’s court and his usual answer was “both statements are wrong”. But, he deferred a final version citing his busy schedule. Once, he did have a last word to utter.
We used to stay close to the Thamirabarani riverbank. It was a custom to take bath in the river, so the banks were mostly crowded with people. One day, a 12-year-old boy went to the river, unwittingly reaching deep waters from which he couldn’t swim back ashore. Seeing the drowning boy, the onlookers shouted for help. No one was daring to risk one’s own life to save another. Just then, a well-dressed college student who’d come for sight-seeing approached the crowd and heard the shouts.
He removed his shoes, watch, specs and purse, covered them with his kerchief and jumped into the river. The fast swimmer reached the boy in no time and brought him back safely to the shore. The onlookers thanked him profusely and lauded his courage. He accepted it with a smile and returned to take back his belongings. But, except the shoes all other items were missing. He asked everybody, but none knew who had stolen his stuff. He said he needed bus fare to return to his village and somebody else arranged it.
This news reached Swaminathan. As usual his mother and wife gave their opinions. He shared his opinion thus: the youth who saved the boy was a “good person” and the one who took away the belongings of the saviour was a “bad person”; the rest who’d shouted for the help to save the boy were normal people; it wasn’t right to club “all” as good or bad.
Both women agreed with him. Aren’t his words relevant today, too?