"Could you pass me the salad, please?" asked a dejected voice. Well, a salad

might not be cause enough for a serious amount of jubilation, particularly

if it is comprised merely of horizontally-sliced onions, imperfectly-cut

tomato cubes and fiery red chillies. But why, then, even refer to it as

'salad?' One must at least question why "pass the - burp - onions etc.!" was

not said instead. Answering this sort of question implies getting into some

serious semantics. If nothing else, metaphors that emanate from seemingly

harmless terms of speech need to be considered. For example, a matchbox is

called a batee in Punjabi. The word is also used to denote the number

thirty-two. Furthermore, to the Urdu comprehending ear, the first

monosyllable of the word referring to a matchbox has the same sound as the

word meaning 'mother.' Thus, merely vocalizing the desire for a light can

become loaded with potential subliminal effects based upon implied, as well

as perceived, insinuations of the requestor. This in turn may trigger off a

grimace, a grin or a growl.

Clearly, it was not a dearth of food available on the table that caused the

disconcerting tone of voice, for there were numerous dishes available for

the obvious purpose of consumption. Therefore, there had to have been

certain innate reasons that were leading to the evident erosion of relish

and scarcity of delight. Layered generations of obligation built upon

reaping privilege from pervading exploitation could indirectly have

compelled this particular intonation. A self-induced psychosomatic imbalance

was another plausible reason for the resonating discontent. Or a

predetermined genetic disorder of some sort was the determining factor

prompting the resulting quagmire of reluctance. Possibly it was a lack of

exertion necessitated by motivation that was sustaining this stagnant mire

of useless sustenance. Another plausible reason for bland bleakness could

simply have been the lack of an exciting life with a wicked wife. Whatever

the reason, it certainly was not tangible enough to explain the

unjustifiably inappropriate vibe to emanate from such a trivial request.

Perhaps deviance, decadence or other self-destructive characteristics

dedicated to pursuit of instant gratification were, after all, essential

for being able to have a happy meal. Or maybe incest was the prerequisite to

get even with all the inherent paradoxes that plague our lives? Who knows

what secrets will remain buried deep within our hearts and holes? Now, if

this condition was intentional, either due to inertia or because of

complacency, then was the consequent attitude not a sure sign of

ungratefulness? Probing into such matters reveals a fundamental flaw in the

quest of obtaining utility from unbridled realization, which is nowhere like

the supposed bliss obtained through enlightenment of the perfected soul.

Despite or in spite of it all, there was another reality that could have

some bearing on this disconcerting situation. The fact that living things

eat other living things is a fundamental fact of existence, yet this evident

pattern of consumption is usually left unchallenged. Not due to

obliviousness but rather because it is an obvious requirement. Why else is

it that few wonder what the poor chicken - that gets plucked and partitioned

to swim in spicy gravy for our nutritional delight - feels right before that

swift movement of the butcher' top heavy knife, and moreover, whether it

laments or rejoices release from the perpetuating cycle of ill-fated

genocide.

A lack of adequate belongings is often professed as a pathetic

circumstantial condition to get trapped into. Vacuous desires are blamed

through many a disgruntled expressions, as diminishing needed levels of

testosterone. It is paradoxical then, that a leg-less man, begging for money

from halting cars at a traffic light, can ask for his allocated portion of a

meal with a bit more dignity than that meek voice of submissiveness

requesting, "could you pass me the salad, please?"