Evil eye, as the definitive explanation of all undesirable occurrences, remains, for the most part, a feminine thing. Consequently, young men who, in their conversations, fail to give the proper amount of respect to it often find themselves out of the good books of their mothers, aunts, grandmothers and, later, their wives. That said, men are hardly what they used to be even as recently as thirty years ago; so now there are more than a few of that gender who are quick to seize on the evil-eye excuse for all their failings and misfortunes.
I cannot speak on behalf of other ‘doubters’, but I have invariably been misunderstood and unfairly judged on this front. I am not denying that I have always been critical of the propensity to attribute any misfortune to evil eye; but that is by no means because I categorically rule it out. I know way too much philosophy to commit the fallacy of proving the nonexistence of something.
My stance on evil eye is more subtle than that – as it turns out, much more so for many to be able to wrap their heads around. I understand that the whole subject of evil eye is supposed to be shrouded in mystery; but one point ought to be as clear as day. Sadly, it is anything but, for way too many people (for reasons best known to them) think of evil eye as a religious belief. Over the years I have requested countless such enthusiasts to show how it is a religious issue; each time managing merely to draw a blank.
So, while I cannot, and do not, rule evil eye out based on any theoretical argument (nobody can), it is my considered opinion that until we know more about it on a documented, empirical basis (as opposed to the anecdotal type ‘evidence’ that exclusively sustains it to date), evil eye sounds an awful lot like superstition to me. As for superstition, I do not believe any reasonable man would like to go anywhere near it; not in a sober state, at any rate.
A significant development in the life of a human being happens when he graduates from ‘The drinking glass broke’ to ‘I broke the drinking glass’. With this assumption of responsibility on his part, he transitions, in many ways, from a child to the first stages of adulthood. (Sadly, some are never able to make the transition.) It is true that it is not necessarily somebody’s fault that culminates in shattered drinking glasses – often it is a stiff breeze, a cat, an unfortunate timing of things or sheer bad luck that it can be attributed to. But almost all turns of events around us owe themselves to multiple factors; and a careful analysis of any of them invariably establishes that a number of things could quite conceivably have been done better (regardless of the many factors that are out of human control): not placing the drinking glass too close to the edge of the table, say, in our example.
A man does himself no favour when he chooses to hide behind the evil-eye excuse for any calamity that befalls him. Because by doing so he refuses to accept any part of the blame and thereby misses out on the opportunity to reconsider his own conduct, and to thereby try and prevent the same thing from repeating itself. He can choose to take responsibility or else behave like a child. The choice is his to make.
Similarly, a woman can take the easy option of blaming evil-eye to account for all her troubles (if she can resist the temptation of blaming her husband instead, that is). Or she can choose the much more difficult alternative of accepting at least part of the responsibility for her problems. This latter option is uncomfortable for two reasons. First, the acceptance of even some of the blame – for few things have the capacity to hurt the ego more than to accept that one was found wanting; and second, the obligation to correct her future course of action. In comparison, the former option is infinitely more attractive as it allows her to go on her merry way.
Broadly speaking, an undesirable thing that befalls an individual can have one, or a combination, of three explanations: One: It could be a test which, depending on how he performs under that pressure, ends up making a stronger, better human being out of him (in other words, the crisis is an opportunity in disguise). Two: It could be the consequence of foolish choices made by him in the immediate or distant past. Three: It could be a result of factors that are out of his control: wars in the world, political turmoil, the in-laws, stock exchange meltdowns, evil machinations of enemies, and the like. Evil eye (provided there is such a thing) would also belong to this last category. While one can never say with certainty which explanation (or which combination, and with what weightage of each) accounts for a particular calamity, it certainly needs no Einstein to conclude that instead of blaming real or imaginary factors that are out of his control, a man should focus on things he can do something about. Blaming other people and inanimate objects is extremely counterproductive because it always makes matters worse by making him bitter.
So, is evil eye real or merely a figment of popular imagination? Well, who knows! But until we know the answer one way or the other; and, more importantly, until we figure out its ‘mechanism’ so that something could be done about it, there is hardly any use worrying about it. Till that time, the prudent thing to do instead is to focus on what, within one’s powers, can be done to improve one’s lot; and if nothing answers to that description, then what must not be done to make one’s problems even worse.
