There
is something odd about the heading. It shows the writer has already decided
that there will be sequels to this post (otherwise, why title it as 1?). This
may be to your good or bad, I don’t know.
I
am in the middle of reading Adam Smith’s magnum opus An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, and
I was surprised to come across many statements. Initially I thought I would
write one post compiling all these statements that caught my attention. But, my
reading this tome has become an extended affair and I thought I will drip-feed
my readers howsoever few the surprising statements may be.
We
have all heard how Smith said that the baker bakes bread not to feed you but to
make money. Though you must have heard it many times before, I impose on you
and give in full the version I have read: “It is not from the benevolence of
the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their
regard to their own interest.”
OK,
as familiarity breeds contempt, I will give something less contemptible! How
about, “[T]he clergy are … the greatest engrossers of land.” In the language of
that time and in the context of this post, engrossers must mean those who encroach
or appropriate public lands. This is also mentioned as the “Enclosure”
movements in England in the 18th century. My understanding is
justified through the following short quote from the book, “The plenty and
cheapness of good land … are the principal causes of the rapid prosperity of
new colonies. The engrossing (my
emphasis) of land, in effect, destroys this plenty and cheapness.”
Now,
Smith, though a friend of David Hume, was not known to be an atheist, or even
against religion. It should then be all the more surprising that he had taken a
firm stand against a particular, pernicious practice of a religion -
encroachment. But, going beyond the surprise factor, let us see how things have
changed, if at all, in a different place, India. Different place, different
time, different people … different strokes.
It
is not impossible to locate new and newer small roadside temples, in Chennai
particularly and I suspect in other cities, towns across the country too. At
first it is a few bricks around an idol that has mysteriously appeared out of
nowhere on a footpath or at the bottom of a tree along it. Sometimes, it might
be a small shrine inside a housing colony with its entrance jutting out on to
the footpath. Where there is a temple, there are bound to be devotees. This
inevitably happens.
Gradually
the temple and the number of visitors grow, and attract auxiliary service
establishments, like a small stall for keeping footwear, a shop for dispensing,
at cost, material for performing prayers to the deity. If it is an idol at the
foot of a tree, a revetment is built. And, it grows and soon the pedestrian
finds herself on the thoroughfare, exposing herself to the danger of being run over
by a speeding vehicle but saved only because the driver had come to a
screeching halt to pray at the temple! Never mind he caused a traffic incident.
He is catering to his spiritual need; leave him alone!
Encroaching
of land by deities, endorsed by the religious!
OK,
there is no clergy in the sense Smith meant, but where there is a god, a line
of clergymen (mercifully not too many clergy women!) is sure to form anon, each
allocating time to serve the encroaching god.
Yet,
do not go to Smith to help you dislodge this idol. He is not that powerful. The
national highway regulating agency is not that powerful, the municipal
corporations are not that powerful, town authorities are even less so, god
having suborned all and sundry, including the Resident Welfare Associations (in
urban areas), to his cause. This is encroachment by the all powerful. Do not
bet against it, damn Smith’s caution that such encroachments destroy economic
activities.
Economics
or spirituality? Live by balancing on the edge of the foot path or worse, on
the road. You live by your choice, or die by it, when the driver does not stop
to pray.
Raghuram
Ekambaram
No comments:
Post a Comment