Children and Pain

Some time ago, some fellows had a moral dilemma. They were talking about shouting at wives and I interrupted: why would you shout at your wife? Just be nice to her. They said you can’t be nice to your wife when she has patently annoyed you. I asked them to show more charity but they wondered where I was coming from. They asked me, “What’s wrong in shouting at wives, Don’t people beat children? Is it right or wrong?”


I now answer that it is wrong first to compare shouting at a wife that one does from their weakness and is not a tool like beating a child. To compare them both is to not understand the two different cases at all. I have other means with my child but I use beating (pain) as it is most effective (why such effectiveness is justified only in the case of children will be dealt with later). In the case of my wife I can’t use pain is because I am suppose to show love.


To shout is the absence of good. A patient person would show tolerance before breaking. To not possess the virtue of patience is not an excuse to yell or beat someone. A much more patient person would show a lot more patience before breaking. My point is, a person who makes a scathing remark instantly on his wife or yells at her at the drop of a hat, it shows, how much love has subjected him to obedience and virtue. Love makes us love our mothers. Love should make us love our wives and be understanding, respect their free will what they choose for themselves (until unless it undermines your marriage as a whole) Love makes a person increase in holiness (being patient, pure, generous, understanding).


And here is where I said that if a husband yells at a wife where he ought to show love, he is weak. This is fine, everyone is weak in different degrees. There is none who has escaped the fallen nature of Man. But some are weaker than others. Some try not to be weak and in that they show a lot of virtue because love disposes them to virtue. Some of them have by habit, created a vice. They are those of whom their wives say, “My husband, if my house is not in order, he gets wild” or “My husband, the minute he steps into the door, poor man, bad day at work, starts screaming at everyone” These men are more weak than others. They ought to try harder as the good men who love their wives and will never raise their voices much less fingers even under fire. Testimony to this fact is my father (so that no one says such men don’t exist. And Yes, I believe it is holiness that has made my father like this. Without holiness, he would be just like other men. )


Now I come to the crux of the topic of why such love may not be used with children.


You don't beat a woman because she is not a child. Somehow this line may seem to give the license to beat children. What is it about children that they can be beaten and what is it really about adults that they can't. There is something in adults (woman, adults, parents et all) that is missing in children due to which what is torture to woman is not so to children. What is ‘manhandle’ to woman is not so to children. What is ‘force’ to woman is not so to children. And that's why beating children, shouting at them is not the same and cannot be compared to beating and shouting at wives and women in general.


I am not trying to justify violence against children. Violence is to harm a person as its end. Beating children is violence when you beat children as an end. When you beat children because you are a father and you want to show them who is boss amounts to violence. I am not speaking of this form of beating. This form of beating uses 'they are my children I can do what I want' as a pretext to manhandle other beings. It makes objects of children such as tables and chairs we can fling in any corner of the house. This is downright wrong and is condemned by me too. But I am talking of beating in a much more philosophical sense


Beating causes pain. A child at his/her age cannot understand why a particular thing is good or bad. If he wants it, he wants it. It is not given to a child to reason or understand: may be my parents are not that wealthy. I think I am wrong in my demands. May be I will be a good boy and they, in their joy, give it to me


A child cannot reason like this. His will though, when he comes of age and that is why an adult (teen) is taken to psychologist to mend his ways and not to a policeman, to be threatened to mend them anyways. A psychologist will 'reason' with the teenager which if the teenager finds reasonable will amend his ways. Whereas a child will be threatened of being sent to military school or of the bogie man or of the devil snatching him away if he makes mischief. Fear of pain and pain itself plays a prominent role in a child's life because at such an age a child is more animal in his mind.


A child is full of passions (emotions). That is why when an adult who does not understand a mother's plight and demands for a bike is said to be acting childish. It is because such a behavior is uncalled for from him. He is supposed to allow reason to prevail. He is supposed to think: my mother is poor, how can I demand a bike from her, what if to make me happy she indulges in committing wrongs like shoplifting or sexual favors just to get me a bike?


A child will not 'reason' but only think through emotions. Emotions engulf a child. It is for the very same reason a child has to be bribed and deals have to be struck to aid him to excel. "Learn mathematics and mama will get you a chocolate" the child does not understand that mathematics is essential to his development to further advance into algebra or calculus like a teenager would. A child does not understand that mathematics is noble and much like an art that can be indulged in as a mathematician or a scientist understands it. Thus a mother uses bribe or fear (pain) to encourage him to believe in something he doesn't understand (why) only for the day that will come when he will understand goodness of mathematics in order to believe.


This is why mothers beat children. There are much tastier delicacies than ‘farex’ and baby food but a child can only understand baby food and liquids. There is still time for chicken, samosas, pulav and biryani. The child's age finally gives in to the 'real' delicacies when he is an adult. In the same way, a child cannot understand 'reason', he wouldn't understand if you speak to him on the nobility of science or the usefulness of geography to encourage him to study.


The child's turns into an adult gives in to reason not into pain and no more can this child-who-is-an-adult-now be beaten but has to be persuaded. Mothers usually complain to their friends, other agony aunts, "my son doesn't listen to me" this means she does not beat him but tries to reason and the ‘agony aunt friends’ don't say, "Why don't you cage him or beat him" they usually say, "Don’t worry, my son will speak to your son"


When a child is an adult and of 'reason' no more can you think of his good so much so to impose it on him of what he can't think for himself. You cannot force ‘good’ on him if he himself doesn't agree it is 'good'. This will be imposing your good on him. No one tells a mother who has a child of 6 years that she is imposing her idea of good on the kid for a child doesn't know what is good. Left to himself, he would think spending all year in Disney land and having all the toys in the world qualifies as ‘good’.


Now I will admit not all kids need to be beaten and rightly aren’t. Some are really disposed to obey. They have been brought up into thinking that only in obedience is their good. This is because they have faith in their parents. This is not a bad thing as people make of ‘faith’ today saying it is blinding and foolish and better not to trust anyone. No parents usually deceive their children. The trouble begins when the parents, in charge of guiding their children look to directing them towards their gain than that of the one's they are supposed to serve (children). We have faith in the law and hence we approach them. The trouble begins when the officers in charge of dispensing law look to their own gain than that of the one's they are supposed to serve (citizens)


Hence you can't beat a woman for your own requirement if she doesn't do or think as you say. She has been endowed with 'reason' as you are, to think for herself, as you think for yourself. Our love is first in respecting this freedom of will they have. We do not respect the freedom of will of a child not because he hasn't any but because his will is distorted and he doesn't know what is good. How do you respect a child's will who is ready to cry and break everything in the shop until the batman figure is his to take home? The same action if committed by a man we would say he is mentally ill. It is simply because the man has not let 'reason' prevail. We talk to the child in the language he understands-pain. Only till pain gives in to reason and no more does pain need to be used. For if it is used on a man who can reason, it is torture.

N.B: I am only writing on why people beat children and not why children ought to be beaten.

The Final analysis of Our Hope

I recall once asking my friend as we were on a boat ride towards Elephenta Caves. I looked at him in the face and told him: what If Moses or just one of the prophets, like Elijah is not true. The whole of the Bible will fall like a pack of Cards. For Jesus meets Moses on the mount during the Transfiguration. If Moses is not true, Jesus could not meet it and yet the Apostles record he did. So the Apostles lie. If the Apostles lie, the Bible loses its credibility as divinely inspired. Every other thing falls apart. 2000 years of Christendom starts crumbling down.

My friend replied that if the Bible was not true, he does not know what to believe in. His life might as well be summarized as a chain of endless days with no meaning at all. He wouldn’t have any hope of any good he did. A similar experience engulfed me recently when I was at Mass in Church

Whenever I come forward for communion in Holy Mass, I contemplate on the Cross or face of Jesus. The other day it dawned on me: what if Jesus’ death on the cross failed to dispose me towards love? What if it failed to bring out pain and sadness of his death and the glory of his victory? What if one day it all stops happening and I become indifferent to the whole event of the Passion and Death that divided time and changed the course of History?
I will have no hope left then.

On Fasting

Yesterday, we were speaking on fasts. Fast is to abstain from all or some kind of foods or go hungry to deny oneself. The rationale behind a fast is as important as the fast itself. If the fasting, from denying oneself turns into say, gaining oneself such as gaining for oneself a toned body or losing weight before the wedding or a ramp walk, then the same fast becomes a diet.


We have talked about the ontology of a fast. Now let us get on to rationale of a fast. I am a catholic and suffering is a fundamental element of Christianity. Jesus suffered for each one of us in the world and his suffering, redeemed. Anytime there is redemption, there is an element of suffering involved. Whether you redeem your brother who is unable to pay off his dues or you apologize on behalf of your mischievous son. There is always ‘denying’ in redemption. But look what Christ’s redemption did? It brought salvation to mankind. So we are asked to be like Christ and participate in this redemption by ourselves redeeming others and being the instrument of God in the lives of others. This will entail lot of suffering, don’t you think?

Fasting is based on the same lines of denying. While suffering in general, is hidden in the role a Mother plays for his son late into midnight checking on his temperature, fasting is a direct love. In the mother’s case, love is explicit and suffering is implicit. In fasting, the choice of suffering is may be explicit but is motivated by love. Christians fast to share the pain of the cross as Simon of Cyrene helped Jesus to carry the cross. Christians fast to tell Jesus, “Lord, you died for my sin, surely lord, I can give up my desire for coffee today for you”

Every form of Love requires an expression. The Romeo does it by climbing a perilous hilltop or idly waiting at the bus stop for an hour. There is suffering involved here too. But he is not concentrating on suffering but on love. Love motivates him to do it. What he is trying to say by buying an expensive diamond that cost him two months’ salary and his own bike is: I love you. The faithful do it by a fast. What they are trying to tell God is that, “Look, I love you, I am denying my desire for you. I have to die to my desire and I want to show you, I can go this far for you simply because love motivates me to do that,”

Love of Learning

I have learned the secrets from the philosophers. I have understood the actions of God and his design from the theologians. I have learned the mysteries of the world from the contemplatives. I have transcended to learn what is noble from the mystics. I have learned to appreciate simple truths with the pleasure of reasoning and logic.


Yet all this is not enough for me to love my neighbor. All the reasons my neighbor does what he does is not enough for me to show compassion for I am busy scheming my next rebuttal. Knowledge does not give you grace but opens one out to the reality of it: that one needs it and it cannot be culled out of books


How much more proof does one need that mere learning cannot help me love a neighbor while a poor peasant who knows nothing about the awesomeness of the ways of the world and of noble conversations may love a neighbor more than I. What more proof that grace comes from God only if I in humility ask it and no amount of knowledge of the world can teach me any bit of love.


I read about God design of free will and how he can achieve his will without destroying my freedom and will. I may have understood such lofty proofs but if I may not able to love my neighbor sitting next to me, how much does the knowledge account to? It is better that I learn to love than to be puffed up with pride of learning that does not dispose me to love.

Work

My friend spoke to me about a boy who was always enthusiastic about doing work. Whenever the teacher put up some work and asked for volunteers, one hand was raised in the room. It looked as if rest of the hands were tied to the ground. This boy loved doing work. My friend even went on to share that he did not always do the work proficiently lest someone complain that he did the work as he had competence. It was his enthusiasm to accept work. Competence comes much later.


I try often to mull on why does Man deny work? All of us run away from work. Work has become now an evil. Man tries as much as he can to run away from it. If yesterday, we were asked what we would like to be given by a genie, most of us would say, give us our dream. Today, people would say, give me a million dollars so that they can just buy their dreams or can do without them. They can just sit in the house and do nothing? Is doing nothing the new profession?


At a certain level I can comprehend the apparent ‘evil’ of work. In my own experiences of being asked to volunteer for helping a kids club and teaching another set of kids, I refused. Deep inside, I knew it was not lack of time. It was the fear of the infringement of my freedom. It was the fear that doing this work would not leave any time for myself. It was an inherent selfishness that ran through my decisions.


There are people who on being asked if they would like to do a certain thing will respond: let me see, what I am doing today…I seem to be free, alright send me the details about the location and venue. There are another set of people who have nothing to do on the particular day but would dread vouching their time for an activity, course, seminar, work et cetera. They would think, “oh dear, work, I won’t be able to live my ‘own’ life”. My first objection is, if you really had something to do, then it is in direct conflict with your ‘own’ life. But if you have nothing on your agenda for the particular slot and yet refuse, it is a lack of will. Why is there a lack of will? Surely the will would be present if one would be invited to a party. The will is pointing to emotion and emotions don’t wish to work. It wishes only that, that could please it.


On a deeper level, people fail to dissolve themselves into the work they have been asked to do. They fail to identify themselves with work. They think work is one thing and my life is another. Thus work is a direct opposition to their comfort, joy and pleasures. But work should be my pleasure. That I work and so I eat. Often I have felt very guilty eating because I haven’t worked to merit food to give me sustenance. Work should be what defines me, fulfills me, gives me joy that I am useful, productive and worthy of love and recognition.


Have you ever seen the grin on a person’s face when he says: today, I went to market bought vegetables. I continued to the post office to post my mother’s letter. I took a number to the doctor, my brother is sick. I came home to send the files you needed over the internet. I finished my homework by afternoon and went to church in the evening”. In all this, you don’t see whining but a sense of a fruitful day. You do not see the person so much complaining as much as the person wishes to sing praises to a dossier of work he has committed, completed and feels good about. He has the will in doing this work, he dissolves himself, his preferences and desires and commands himself: my freedom is not taken away but is expressed as I believe in spending my time by going to the market and by waiting at the dispensary. It does not make me late for my ‘own’ work but gives me time to finish that what has been given to me, what I have accepted as my own, my responsibility.


Only until you can call work your ‘own’, can work be done and man be productive. Until then, selfishness persuades you to protect yourself from anything that can help you find yourself. Selfishness wants you solely for itself and makes you into a slothful bag of nothingness. It wants you to listen to your music, your movies, and your breakfast at home at your convenience, your Saturday evenings, your sleep, your life. Every time we find it difficult to commit or do work, it is a testimony to how selfish we are and speaks of our state of holiness. It is different if one does not commit for the fear of laying our feet in to too many things. That is prudence not selfishness


Don’t foolishly believe you are protecting your self-interests when you don’t even know what you wish to do in the day. Through work, we know ourselves but through our selfishness we know nothing but passing pleasures. Watching television, movies and playing games are temporary pleasures. Even a bored lad reads something as noble as a newspaper. But he may not be reading it for he wishes to be a well-informed person but because he does not know what else to do with his time and life.