Saturday, January 17, 2026

Between two lives




---

Between Two Lives
I was nursing a cup of bitter airport coffee at Changi, watching the quiet efficiency of the world pass by—travelers moving with purpose, announcements gliding through the air like practiced apologies—when the man approached me.

He hesitated first. Then, noticing my passport lying open on the table, he asked softly,
“Sir… are you from India?”

There was something in his voice—neither confidence nor desperation, but a cautious hope. I nodded.

“My name is Ramu,” he said, lowering himself into the chair opposite me without waiting for permission. “I don’t know why, but I felt I should speak to you.”

He looked ordinary in every way—thin, sun-darkened skin, cheap sandals, a shirt ironed too many times. The kind of man whose life passes unnoticed unless it collapses entirely.

Only then did I notice the men sitting a little distance away. They weren’t watching us openly, but their eyes returned to Ramu often enough. Guards—not uniformed, but unmistakable.

Ramu followed my gaze and gave a faint smile.
“They are with me,” he said. “Or maybe I am with them.”

After a pause, words spilled out—not dramatically, but like water escaping a cracked pot.

He was poor. From Bihar. His wife worked as a maid in Patna, leaving home before sunrise, returning after dark. Two children—one in school, one too young to understand why milk had become occasional instead of daily. Debt sat on his chest like a stone.

Then came the proposal.

Eighty lakhs.

All travel paid. Hospital expenses covered. A small shop promised once he returned. Enough, he said, to turn survival into dignity.

“I am selling my kidney,” he said plainly, as if stating a train schedule.

The recipient—a wealthy man from another country—was traveling with him. Life and death, sitting side by side in business class, divided by money and biology. The surgery would happen somewhere in Southeast Asia, where questions were fewer and paperwork lighter.

“In India,” Ramu said, “they ask too many questions. Relative, blood group, family consent. Here… they only ask for payment.”

I knew this. We all do. I had seen cases where relatives donated kidneys, acts of quiet heroism that never reached newspapers. I had also read about darker stories—men kidnapped, drugged, waking up with scars and silence.

This, at least, was consent. Compelled consent—but consent all the same.

During the long layover, while the others slept stretched across airport chairs, Ramu slipped away. Fear had finally reached him.

“What if I don’t wake up?” he whispered.
“What if my children grow up without a father?”

His ticket and passport were not with him. They were “kept safe” by the party arranging everything. Safe—from escape.

“I need the money,” he said. “But I am afraid, sir. You are educated. You have seen the world. Tell me—what should I do?”

That question landed on me like a burden I had no right to carry.

What advice could I give?

To walk away would mean returning to debt, hunger, humiliation.
To go ahead meant gambling with his body so others could keep theirs intact.

I told him gently what I knew—that one kidney can sustain a life, that many live normally after donation. I also told him the truth—that risk never asks permission, and exploitation rarely wears a villain’s face.

He listened quietly.

“I don’t blame them,” he said suddenly, surprising me.
“The man who needs my kidney… he is also fighting death. For him, this is the only way. For me, this is also the only way.”

Life, it seemed, had created a marketplace where desperation met desperation, only the currency was flesh.

The guards eventually noticed his absence. They came. There was no violence, no shouting. Just firm hands, practiced smiles, inevitability.

Before leaving, Ramu turned once more.

“If my children can study,” he said, “if my wife doesn’t have to scrub other people’s floors forever… then maybe this kidney will have lived a better life in another body.”

He was taken away.

I finished my coffee long after it had gone cold.

At an airport where millions pass each day chasing comfort, ambition, or escape, two lives had intersected briefly—one buying time, the other selling a part of himself to purchase hope.

We often speak of the sanctity of the human body. But poverty, I realized, has a way of rewriting moral codes. When survival is at stake, ethics become negotiable, and the line between victim and participant blurs.

Perhaps the real tragedy is not that kidneys are sold—but that a world exists where a man must sell a piece of himself so his family can remain whole.

And somewhere between law and compassion, between life saved and life risked, the question remains unanswered:
Is this commerce—or sacrifice?

Friday, January 09, 2026

Sanghamitra: Daughter of the Bodhi Tree



Sanghamitrā: Daughter of the Bodhi Tree

The palace gardens of Pāṭaliputra rustled with birdsong. Young Sanghamitrā often slipped away from her attendants to sit beneath a wide peepal tree, tracing her fingers across its bark. She would whisper to the leaves, “Why do you give shade without asking anything in return?” Nature answered her in silence, and she learned its lesson of patience.

But the palace no longer rang with laughter. The Kalinga war had ended, leaving behind not triumph but ashes. Emperor Aśoka, once called Chandashoka—fierce Aśoka—walked the halls with restless eyes.

One evening Sanghamitrā found him by the lotus pond, his sword rusting at his side.

“Father,” she asked softly, “why do you no longer dine with us? Why do you stare so at the ground?”

Aśoka’s voice was hollow.
“Child, I have seen too much blood. The cries of mothers and children follow me even in sleep. What is an empire worth, if it is built on suffering?”

“Then let the empire be built on healing,” Sanghamitrā said, her young face glowing with conviction. “Like the trees heal with their shade. Teach the people another way.”

Aśoka looked at her, startled at the wisdom in her words. “Perhaps the Buddha’s path of Dharma is the only way left for me,” he whispered.


Years later, Sanghamitrā watched her elder brother Mahinda depart for Sri Lanka to spread the Buddha’s teaching. She too felt a stirring, as though the island called her name. One evening she approached her father.

“Father, if Mahinda can carry the message of the Buddha, so can I. But I wish to plant not just words—a living symbol.”

Aśoka raised his brows. “You mean the Bodhi tree, the very tree under which the Buddha awakened?”

“Yes,” she said, her eyes bright. “A branch from that tree. If it thrives in Lanka’s soil, the people will know that Dharma cannot be uprooted.”


The voyage began under a clear sky. The Bodhi sapling, wrapped in silk and earth, was placed at the center of the ship as if it were a king. Sanghamitrā, now a nun in saffron robes, sailed with eleven companions.

But the sea turned dark. Storm winds rose, waves crashed like walls of black glass. Sailors clung to the mast, crying out in fear.

“The sea spirits are angry—we will sink!” one shouted.

Sanghamitrā stood firm, her hands on the Bodhi sapling. “If this tree lives, the Dharma will live. Fear not. Even the storm must bow to truth.”

She began to chant verses of the Buddha. Her voice, steady against thunder, calmed the hearts around her. By dawn, the storm had passed, leaving the sea a silver mirror.


At Anuradhapura, King Devanampiya Tissa and his queen awaited her arrival. Drums rolled as the Bodhi sapling was carried ashore. The queen clasped Sanghamitrā’s hand.

“From today,” she said, “you are my sister.”

But not all were pleased. Somadeva, the Brahmin priest of the court, whispered to the king, “Do not let a foreign woman rule your soul. She will steal your throne of faith.”

A tribal chief named Kurung, famed for his “mystical powers,” joined in. “Our spirits bow to no foreign tree,” he sneered, shaking a talisman of bones.

Yet the queen stood resolute. “This woman brings no weapons, only service. Let us judge her by deeds, not fear.”


Sanghamitrā did not answer with sermons. She and her nuns tended to the sick, washed the wounds of beggars, and fed hungry children. Word spread: The lady in saffron heals without asking for gold. She serves without pride.

One day the king, disguised, went among his people. He saw Sanghamitrā kneeling by a leper, washing his sores with her bare hands.

Returning to the palace, he told the queen, “I saw no goddess today, only a woman who chose to be less than all, so that all may rise. Her soul is selfless.”


When the Bodhi tree was finally planted at Anuradhapura, Somadeva scoffed, “It will wither.”

But the sapling grew, its leaves rustling like whispered prayers. Even Kurung, the tribal chief, bowed at its roots.

Thus Sanghamitrā was no longer just Aśoka’s daughter. She became the Mother of the Bhikkhunī Order in Lanka, remembered for planting both a tree and a way of life that gave shade to generations.

And under its branches, people would tell their children: “Once, a woman crossed the sea, carrying a tree in her heart. That is why we live in Dharma’s shade today.”




---


Footnote




Sanghamitra was the daughter of Emperor Ashoka and Queen Devi, renowned for her role in spreading Buddhism to Sri Lanka in the 3rd century BCE.


Early Life

Born around 282 BCE in Vidisha, she married briefly before renouncing worldly life to become a Buddhist nun, renamed Ayapali. Her brother Mahinda shared her commitment to Buddhism.


 Mission to Sri Lanka

In 252 BCE, at King Devanampiya Tissa's request, Ashoka sent Sanghamitra with a Bodhi tree sapling, which she planted in Anuradhapura. She converted royal women, established a nunnery, and trained nuns.


 Legacy

Sanghamitra dedicated her life to proselytizing among women, dying around 203 BCE; the Sri Lankan king honored her with personal funeral rites. The Bodhi tree remains a sacred site.



Friday, January 02, 2026

Why Ghosts Never Leave Our Homes-or Our Minds

H --- ## **Why Ghosts Never Leave Our Homes—or Our Minds**
The thought crossed my mind while watching the film *There Is a Ghost in Our House*. It was not fear that lingered after the screen went dark, but familiarity. A quiet recognition—as if the idea of a ghost was never foreign to us. It has always existed, silently occupying a corner of human consciousness. From there, my mind drifted, as it often does, to my all-time favourite ghost film—*Ghost* (1990). Not for its special effects, but for its emotional depth. Love that refuses to dissolve with death. Memory that refuses to fade. And of course, **“Unchained Melody”**—a song that seems to float between two worlds. When it plays, one does not think of fear; one thinks of longing. Of bonds that death cannot neatly sever. Indian cinema understood this truth much earlier. Long before Hollywood romanticised spirits, Hindi films explored ghosts as carriers of **memory, justice, and unfinished destiny**. *Mahal* (1949), with Ashok Kumar and Madhubala, remains etched in the collective psyche—not because it frightened audiences, but because it mesmerised them. The dim corridors, echoing footsteps, and that unforgettable boat scene where the past seems to glide silently into the present. The song *“Aayega Aanewala”* does not announce a ghost; it summons inevitability. Then came *Madhumati* (1958). Vyjayanthimala’s character returns not merely as a ghost, but as a force of moral reckoning. Wronged in one lifetime, justice eludes her until another. Here, reincarnation and revenge merge seamlessly. The ghost is not frightening; she is purposeful. She restores balance where life had failed. What is striking across these films—Indian or Western—is that ghosts are rarely grotesque. They are melancholic, restrained, even dignified. They appear when something remains unresolved: love unfinished, injustice unanswered, promises broken. The ghost, then, is not an intruder, but a reminder. This universality extends far beyond cinema. Across cultures and continents, belief in ghosts persists. India speaks of *bhūts* and *prets*, Japan of *yūrei*, England of manor-house spirits, Africa of ancestral souls, and the Middle East of *jinn*. Civilisations that share nothing else—language, religion, climate—share this belief. Technology may have advanced from oil lamps to LEDs, from handwritten letters to Instagram, but this idea has remained remarkably untouched. Even great minds were not immune. Abraham Lincoln reportedly spoke of apparitions in the White House and even foresaw his own death. Winston Churchill, a man of iron resolve, once fled a room convinced he had encountered a spectral presence. Napoleon Bonaparte believed a guiding spirit accompanied him. Charles Dickens, realist and reformer, firmly believed in ghosts and claimed personal encounters. These were not timid men. They were leaders, thinkers, and rational minds of their time. Their belief suggests that ghosts are not born of fear alone, but of **humility before the unknown**. Which brings us to the inevitable question: *Are ghosts real?* The debate, perhaps, is misplaced. The question of whether ghosts exist is no different from asking whether God exists, or whether rebirth is possible. Rationalists like **Yuval Noah Harari**, armed with neuroscience, evolutionary biology, and data, will dismiss all three as stories humans tell themselves to cope with uncertainty—useful myths, perhaps, but myths nonetheless. And yet, for every such argument, millions smile back. Not in ridicule, but in quiet confidence. Because belief is not always an argument; often, it is an experience. One does not prove love before feeling it. One does not demand laboratory validation for grief, memory, or presence. Ghosts, like God or rebirth, survive precisely because they operate outside the jurisdiction of pure reason. They inhabit memory, intuition, moral order, and unresolved longing. Indian philosophy offers a calm explanation. The *Bhagavad Gita* reminds us: **“Na hanyate hanyamāne śarīre”** *The soul is not destroyed when the body is destroyed.* If the soul is eternal, then perhaps a ghost is not an aberration, but a pause—an echo when the transition is incomplete. Cinema, music, and storytelling merely give that echo a form. Whether it is Vyjayanthimala standing silently on a misty hillside, Madhubala’s voice drifting across still waters, or *Unchained Melody* playing as love transcends death, ghosts return to remind us of one simple truth: **relationships do not end neatly**. Ghosts endure because **memory endures**. They are not here to frighten us, but to whisper—of love that outlives life, of justice delayed but not denied, and of journeys that do not conclude when the curtain falls. Some debates are not meant to end. They exist to remind us that however advanced we become, the human mind still bows before mystery. And perhaps, when rational certainty laughs at belief, belief quietly laughs back—secure in the knowledge that not everything meaningful needs to be measurable. As the *Gita* gently concludes: **“Avyaktādīni bhūtāni vyakta-madhyāni bhārata”** *All beings emerge from the unmanifest and return to the unmanifest.* Between the unseen and the seen, between silence and song, ghosts—real or imagined—continue to walk with us. ---