We were curious, especially as he seemed to decide that the tree was his home. This after all was no forest. It was Juhu. Smack in the middle of one of the more chaotic, bustling and yet up market real estates in suburban Mumbai. And there he stayed, night after night. Curiously never, ever sitting, or lying down. Day or night, the man always just stood. No wonder his legs were so swollen.

Khare Baba ( The standing holy man) as we affectionately began to call him, fashioned himself a kind of children's swing which he slung over one of the many branches of the tree. And late at night when we would come back from drunken parties, Khare Baba as would still be standing, but with his arms strung through the swing, so that he would not fall down if he fell asleep. We would hoot greetings, while he would just look disdainfully at us, or sometimes raise a hand back in an affectionate greeting. Khare Baba soon became a fixture.

If you asked him why he always stood, he would just say that it was his penance. To never again sit or lie down. To never rest again. What sin could a man have committed in his 20's that required this kind of punishment upon himself ? He never told us. And as is believed in India, if a man is going through his Tapasya with such extreme penance, then he deserves to be worshiped. And so people from around Juhu would come to be blessed by Khare Baba. Into the same tree they carved a small temple to him. Khare Baba would calmly bless anyone that came, but at no time did he ask for anything. People just gave him food.

I remember sitting silently with Khare Baba late into the night waiting for dawn to come. Smoking hash sometimes, but never saying much. He would in any case refuse to talk about himself. And one day we suddenly noticed that Khare Baba had disappeared. Not just gone wandering around Juhu. He did not return. We never saw him again. We never found out where he went, but then we never knew where he came from either.

The temple is still there. Occasionally I see Coconut shells and lit incense sticks, so I know that the temple still lives. People probably do not know the origins of the temple after 20 years since Khare Baba left. But so what ? it's a temple in a flowing Banyan Tree, and how many of those are left in Mumbai ? The temple ensures this beautiful tree will never be cut down as thousands others are in Mumbai. And perhaps that was Khare Baba's purpose. To stand tall with the tree, for when did a tree ever rest or sit down ?

And when people ask me why I keep coming back to India, I tell them the story of Khare Baba. Anywhere else in the world, the people would have been frightened by this man. They would have complained and worried that he maybe a child molester. The police would have come and taken him away, put him in jail. But in India we never questioned the wandering spirit. Just accepted his arrival with the same ease as we did his leaving.

How could you be a devotee
without being devotion itself ?

You, that measure my madness
standing as you are
on an illusory ground of high morality

How can you know my madness
till you become mad with me ?

I think Shree Shree Ravi Shankar's force does amazing work. Which is why I was surprised at his remarks. For I thought Universal Compassion was at the centre of Hinduism and the Art of Living. If this was a remark from an ordinary person I would not have given it a second thought.

So the question does arise, is "what is Hinduism" and does it need protection from what people are terming as 'obscene' art ? (Which I will say again, I do not believe it is).

What is the Hinduism that needs protection ? How do we see Hinduism now. It seems it now has become an 'identity' which it was never supposed to be. Not in the Hinduism that I have understood. Hinduism is about the concept of experiencing the ultimate unity of all that is space, time and matter. It is about experiencing the illusion of the 'Self'.

If anything Hinduism is about the loss of Identity. And yet more and more people are calling these ideas 'liberal and therefore "pseudo- intellectual'. Is there a new Hinduism that is emerging that has tones of Nationalism in them ?

I wonder how many people who wrote to me would have supported the Islamic Fatwa against Salman Rushdie for writing Satanic Verses ?

I think Shree Shree Ravi Shankar's force does amazing work. Which is why I was surprised at his remarks. For I thought Universal Compassion was at the centre of Hinduism and the Art of Living. If this was a remark from an ordinary person I would not have given it a second thought.

So the question does arise, is "what is Hinduism" and does it need protection from what people are terming as 'obscene' art ? (Which I will say again, I do not believe it is).

What is the Hinduism that needs protection ? How do we see Hinduism now. It seems it now has become an 'identity' which it was never supposed to be. Not in the Hinduism that I have understood. Hinduism is about the concept of experiencing the ultimate unity of all that is space, time and matter. It is about experiencing the illusion of the 'Self'.

If anything Hinduism is about the loss of Identity. And yet more and more people are calling these ideas 'liberal and therefore "pseudo- intellectual'. Is there a new Hinduism that is emerging that has tones of Nationalism in them ?

I wonder how many people who wrote to me would have supported the Islamic Fatwa against Salman Rushdie for writing Satanic Verses ?

So is the rest of the world hating that India is the nation that is the leader. Is the rest of the world unable to get off it's outdated colonial attitudes ? It's time for the world to realize that this really is Asia's century. Not an Asia's century that panders to the West, but an Asia's century where Asian consumers rule the Media World.

Please read the following article that appeared in a very responsible South African newspaper. A more racist point of view I have not read for a long long time.

http://www.timeslive.co.za/opinion/columnists/article346952.ece

And if you wish to read the text here, just read on....

It's a time of year I dread, because I just cannot summon the energy to give half a hoot about a tournament that is heavy on promise and light on entertainment.

Last year, I recall, it was easy to be attracted to the fuss. There was noise and excitement and a great many dancing girls and loud music. This is fun, I thought. But then I watched the cricket and it was, generally, awful.

It's also interminable, dragging on and on, with endless same-same showdowns between teams I don't care about, owned by Bollywood stars whose acting I find silly, and industrialists for whose companies I feel nothing. Does it really take seven weeks to establish which is the best of eight teams? When there's advertising to be sold, it certainly does.

Still the good news is this: Despite the IPL's protestations about it being a huge international contest, I suspect over the years it'll fade away somewhat and become a little bit like World Series Baseball. It may have international ambitions, but it is parochial in its nature.

The limit on international players in the teams is four, which means much of the IPL is made up of middling-to-good journeymen Indian cricketers. That's great in India, but after a while, when the rest of the world has worked out that beneath the noise this is still cricket - albeit a grotesque caricature, people will realise that what they're watching isn't that great.

Take away the fripperies - the music and the cheap, plastic Bollywood glamour - and what you're looking at is not much different to county cricket, which is made up of a few top-class foreign and local Test players, some Kolpaks and middling-to-good journeymen English cricketers.

And not too many people in, say, Bloemfontein, tune into that.

That's why the music is quite so loud, and the dancing girls quite so naked. That's why there are time-outs, and that's why the camera is on some dude in tight jeans and dodgy sunglasses called Shah Rukh Khan. It's because the cricket is so mindless, with its "DLF maximums", its short boundaries and its flat wickets.

And, you know, it's really fine. I don't begrudge it. It's great that cricket is so huge in India. People overseas will watch it in the years to come, but I think not in the numbers Mr Modi would like.

While the English Premier League is clearly his inspiration, he is being held back by provincialism. The reason everybody watches English soccer is because the teams are packed with the best players in the world - not just four per team, but 11 per team. It's as good as it is possible to be.

And they don't play dumbed-down soccer either. That's why the IPL and the Premier League are in fact worlds apart, and eventually people will realise it. The tournament is to be broadcast free-to-air in the UK, on ITV. Those viewership figures will tell a tale, I'm sure.

Back home, I'm going to be watching some South African provincial cricket over the next few weeks to see what talent is coming up from the provinces.

There's nothing else on, after all.

The argument that Hussein should now try and paint Muslim Icons in the nude is a silly , provocative, adversarial statement and a completely political point of view. Nothing to do with Art.

So I amazed at the stand that Shree Shree Ravi Shankar has taken. I have never visited his Ashram , but I always imagined that the words "Art of Living" would be more encompassing and compassionate. I would imagine his movement, called Art of Living, embodies a wider and more artistic creative and holistic way of life. What prompted him then, I wonder, to condemn Hussein and challenge him to paint Muslim icons in the nude ?

Christianity has forever painted Christ in the nude and indeed at crucification often naked too. As have the Greeks and their Gods and Goddesses forever. Nudity has been a tradition in Indian and Hindu art, but never in Islamic art. So why the comparison. As if Hussein went out to create a political statement ? No, it was an artists exploration.

Hussein, on the other hand is alive and well. And very Rich. Rich as never before, painting as never before, and at 95 who could ask for more ? especially from someone that started as a street artist painting film posters. Most of us at 95, if not dead, would be happy to not be in a wheel chair and be able to speak coherently. Hussein paints, has become a genius at marketing himself. As all successful artists (and Guru's) are. There is much to be said for creativity and ageing here.

So lets not feel sorry for M F Hussein. More sorry for ourselves really.

But the question that came was, why do I not feel the same way about the Osterich, or even about Sheep. Because they are plentiful ? Or just because we are used to eating these animals and they are not under threat of extinction. If Tigers were as plentiful sheep, but in farms rather than in the wild, would we bother about them being farmed for their body parts ?

I would, I know. But why am I not bothered about cattle and sheep being farmed ?

Was Hurt Locker good ? Of course it was. It was well shot, modern and created a lot of tension in the four (or is it five) sequences that the film is built up of. Was the performance good ? Yes, adequately good. But if you look at the performances in 'A Prophet", Hurt Locker did not really get near.

Good film Hurt Locker, yes. But is it outstandingly the best film of the year ? No. Despite the predictable script Avatar is. Because I saw in it the film makers vision, heart and belief. Did Hurt Locker really give me an insight into the minds of the young American Soldiers in Iraq ? No. It was the adrenaline addicted bomb demolition Hero I have seen so often disguised in two scenes, one in the shower with him crying and the other in the helicopter where his friend is blaming him for almost getting him killed.

I guess part of my reaction was the way the Iraqi's are shown. Each one of them was a potential terrorist. If one is making a serious film about the Iraq war, then we carry the responsibility to attempting to discover some of the reality of it.

My vote for Avatar as best film of the year. For it believes in a future with hope, without meaning to be something other than that.

Why ? Watching a Guru having sex with with an overweight actress who's face you cannot see is pleasurable ? What drives us ?

It is not possible to have a Guru unless YOU worship him or her. So in effect YOU create the Guru, YOU set the rules, YOU decide what the Guru practices in his or her daily life. And then when the Guru does not conform to YOUR expectations, and finally having created him, YOU destroy him.

We need to know that there is something beyond the mundane existence of our lines. We are scared of death. We are desperately afraid of that which we cannot comprehend of course, but mostly that which we can. Like failure or self loathing. Like disease and loss. We can comprehend these things, but are so mortally afraid of OURSELVES that we look for people who can take responsibility for our lives. And the first person that is willing to come out and say " That's my problem, and I will look after it" becomes your Guru. Unfortunately that is what more and more people are understanding 'Faith' as.

So a Guru has had sex. Who decided that he/she must not ? The Guru or you ? The Guru said it of course, but almost certainly in response to a need in you that if someone had to be 'PURE', then they must not have 'SEX". Why is Purity and SEX so closely related ? Why are we so afraid of sex, so filled with guilt about it that at the slightest provocation we are willing to destroy and revile other people over it on the one hand, and use it as tools of humiliation, conquest and rape on the other hand. I know a lot of people are going to be upset when I equate puritanical attitudes on sex with rape, but the provocations are fundamentally the same.

Some will say that a Guru must be above the 5 senses realm. But hey, it's like saying that if he suffers pain and feels it, and dies of a heart attack or has cavities and has to have a tooth extracted, then he is a mere mortal and cannot be a Guru either. Why just sex and not hunger ? Why does no one object to the sheer luxury and wealth that surround our most successful Guru's? A Guru is a realized soul, they will say without the slightest understanding of that actually meaning. I am not sure I do, but I can certainly say that merely changing your clothes into expensive designer 'Guru Fashion", being able to give long lectures that appease and assuage your guilt and fears, and not having sex does not mean realization.

I do not deny the existence and possibility of beings that have come to experience their Universal Selves. Who are now existing constantly in a full experience of their lack of individuality. But what's sex got to or not got do with that? What do we know about that state to be able to say it is sex less ?

As I said, more often than not, we create the Guru, we make the rules, we ask for behaviour patterns based on our own sense of guilt and morality. And finally we Crucify the Guru for being Mortal. I am sorry, but they were always mortal in any case, but immortal only in our creation. So much so that while everyone else just dies, a Guru 'decides to leave his/her earthly body/

So do I, mate !

The moment I met Nirmal Pandey I knew he was right for the part. He was questioning, searching, yearning, extremely gentle and completely comfortable in his own skin. He was comfortable in his feminine self. And for those of you that remember the first love making scene between Vikram Mallah and Phoolan Devi against the rock wall at dawn will know what I mean. I needed an actor that would allow the actress complete sexual domination without his own ego coming in the way. For a girl (Phoolan Devi) that had experienced sex only as an act of violence and humiliation needed to explore those very acts before she discovered her own sexuality beyond violence.

And few actors would have been able to perform that scene. Seema Biswas was outstanding, creating and exploring the complexities of confusion between sexual desire and the fear of violence and rape. But Nirmal as Vikram Mallah was a perfect foil. Reacting acutely to every moment, every nuance that was happening magically between the actors. In fact Nirmal was the bond between the audience and Seema Biswas - interpreting vividly what Seema was potraying.

Nirmal was so attractive to women that encountered him, that he would set of chain reaction in the crew - and I once even had to let a British make up lady go because her obsession with Nirmal was getting out of hand. At the Cannes and London Film festival he was constantly surrounded by young girls. I thought this was the makings of an International Star. But that never happened. I don't think Nirmal was ready to make the personal sacrifices for stardom. He was not ready to take on the mantle of narcissism that is so essential to travel that path. He was a small town boy at heart and never comfortable in changing that.

Throughout the filming of Bandit Queen, Nirmal was the searcher. One of those actors that was eager to give all of himself, unafraid to bare his inner soul. He would look to discover things about himself as an actor and a human being through his performance, and never once blocked any suggestion or any idea.

We would sometimes smoke a joint and sit in a temple. He would talk about who we are and our significance in the universe. These issues were important to him. I wish I has spent more time with him. I barely saw him after the all the hoopla of Bandit Queen was over. But then who knew he would go so early ?

Where would the world be if Einstein's equations or other scientific/medical knowledge were copyrighted. Where would Hinduism be if the Bhagvad Geeta was copyrighted. Or the Mahabharath. What if the Koran or the Bible were copyrighted ? Or Buddha's teachings. What if all of Ayurveda and all of scientific discovery was copyrighted. The arguments against IP in life saving drugs for HIV have been well documented. The price demanded for such drugs is out of reach of those that are dying of HIV. Thank god for companies like CIPLA that refuse to bow down to international pressure and make the drugs available at affordable costs. Of course they are flouting international laws, but who's laws ? Can there be a fundamental law against saving the lives of millions of people ?

Traditionally India has been a society that looked at Arts and all Knowledge as something meant to be shared with the human race. Really well argued in :

http://www.goodnewsindia.com/Pages/content/traditions/turmeric.html (thank u for the lead, Kavitha).

I also believe that all imagination is born out of a Collective Consciousness. Nothing is imagined or created out of singularity or in isolation. People's consciousness moves to a particular need and creativity is provoked. An ecosystem of creativity is created. Why else did the 60's and 70's give rise to such incredible creativity in pop music ? Ideas are born out of existing ideas. Innovation comes out of provocation and need and borrowed ideas too. If we block that flow, all innovation and creativity wll cease.

However we accept that we live in a modern world and artists and researchers should no longer be doomed to a life of penury or poverty. There are not many Akbar's around to support a Tansen. The argument for IP (Intellectual Property) are strong. The fundamental one being that IP protection is essential for innovation, both artistic and scientific. It costs billions to develop a new drug and millions to produce a film. And innovation would not happen if IP is not protected and financially valuable.

So the fundamental argument is not creative but financial and I can understand that. I make my living because what I create has financial value through some kind of value given to it's IP and copyright. However I do believe that this is a chicken and egg situation. The more IP protection we give in to, the more expensive it becomes to create. Why should it cost 100's of millions of dollars in Hollywood to make a film, or billions of dollars to create a new drug ? Because in world of Intellectual Property we are also creating and protecting hugely disproportionate returns to a a very few people who feed off this very protection.

However we need to find a balance, otherwise the very idea of Copyright and Intellectual Property will go against it's very reason to be. Which is to provoke Creativity and Innovation.

Much love,
Grace

"Their has been no Intelligence failure, or any failure on part of the Police or the State Government. We cannot protect soft targets against 'insidious' bomb attacks. The establishments must install their own security".

I am not sure what the Home Minister is suggesting. It is this kind of statement that will give credence to self appointed 'protection' groups that become thugs and goons in the name of nationalism. I understand that protecting against unexpected attacks is difficult for the greatest intelligence agencies in the world. But this was an area that a major terrorists suspect called Headley (who is in prison in the US) had openly surveyed. And every politician has admitted that was common knowledge in both the Central and the State Intelligence, as well as the Police.

The other surprising thing that emerged in the press statements was a representative of the Home Ministry consistently telling the Press that "we had informed the State Government and the Police of the possibility of this attack in October 2010". I am sure he meant 2009. But he was trying ( under instructions I presume) to absolve the Central Government of the responsibility and putting the blame squarely on the State Government. These Politics, merely two hours after Indian Citizens have been killed in yet another Terrorist attack actually are very very sickening. Especially as they are becoming a pattern and India is fast turning into the softest terror target outside a conflict zone.

Our Home Minister is right. This was not a failure of our Intelligence. It was a failure of the Indian Political system that consistently plays chess games with lives of it's people. It is the games that are played for power jockeying between the Centre and the State Government that do not allow for Intelligence to be of any value.

The citizens of India that have died are Martyred by Terrorists, but just as much by the personal interests of a few Individuals that will stop at nothing to retain their Political Power.

if you are
the God of all
that is,
and is not
can you not
embrace me
in your folds of
darkness
existing as I am
in my own head ?

The political chess game that the film has got embroiled into is so unfortunate. I watched for a while last night as the melodrama was being played out on one TV channel after another, and I wondered. How far is a frenetic Media responsible for forcing people to take stands publicly to a point where the threat of violence looms large over the common people ?

Don't get me wrong. I would rather have frenetic, melodramatic, TRP driven Media than no Media at all. Those of us that remember how our Media completely capitulated under the Emergency declared by Indira Gandhi, leading to a nation driven by whispered rumors and fears of saying the wrong thing at the wrong place, learned to respect the value of free Media as the bedrock of Democracy. But free Media is 'free' to do what ?

I watched last night as responsible ( i thought) presenters tried to out shout the screaming participants, completely subverting the real or potential issues. Should the Media become the 'moral police' of the country themselves ? While I, and most of the country will support Mr khan on this issue , I am afraid of a Media that garners huge TRP's and then present themselves as the Moral police without a commitment to anything but their own market capitalization.

I know that political parties, and in this case the Shiv Sena (though the others are playing their own game) play the Media for their own political purpose. But why is the Media becoming a willing participant and a player in that game ?

I asked my driver, who is Maharashtrian and a once active member of the Shiv Sena what he thought of the whole issue as he watched the drama being unfolded, glued to the TV. His answer ?

"It's all about jobs, Sir. There are so many people without Jobs in the slums of Mumbai that this is bound to happen" Simple.

To 90% of Mumbai's population that cannot afford to go to a Multiplex in any case, the real issue is not whether Rahul Gandhi's traveling a suburban train in Mumbai was pre-planned or not, nor whether the film releases today or not. The real issue is still 'Roti, Kapada aur Makaan'.