Age of Ravan(a)

This is purely an academic exercise based on some references of Ramayan(a) and other such literature and there is nothing religious about this article. So, whoever is reading this article, I kindly suggest to leave your sentiments and religious beliefs aside and view this piece as objectively as you can. Any comments mocking at the plausibility of the numbers below will be plainly ignored.

Ravan(a) is said to be the mighty king of Lanka and is portrayed as "evil" and one to be slayed in the epic Ramayan(a). But those who have read Ramayan(a) in some detail would also admire some of the traits of Ravan(a). To begin with, it is said that he had the blessings of "God" and was powerful and knowledgeable. He was not only a great king but was well versed in Vedas (the highest possible education at that time) and in music (apparently he was a great player of Veena). To call him a "demon", hence takes away all these good accomplishments from him. Perhaps, it is not without reason that they say 'character makes a man'.

It can be gleaned from Ramayan(a) that Ram(a) was in his 30s (about 38 to be precise) when he took on Ravan(a) in battle. But I have always wondered how old must Ravan(a) have been at the time of battle. Just curious. To my knowledge there is no direct or indirect reference to his age in Valmiki Ramayana (and there are several versions of Ramayan(a)). So, I will try and put together some information from other references in Tarantino style ;).

1. When sage Vishwamitra seeks the help of Ram(a) and Lakshman(a), Dasarath(a) is clearly scared at the mention of Ravan(a). This implies that either Ravan(a) was a contemporary of Dasarath(a) or possibly even before. A note here that Dasaratha himself says he has lived for "thousands of years".
2. Ravan(a) had battled with King Karthavirya Arjun(a) and lost the battle. Karthavirya, obviously at some point later, was in turn killed in a battle with Parasuram(a). This implies that Ravan(a) was around even a generation before Parasuram(a)!
3. Various references vaguely mention that Ravan(a) had performed tapas for thousands of years!


My opinion
It is easy to set aside these references as fantasies. I somehow feel it is a lazy way to discard things. Maybe there are other explanations?

1. What if the references were of multiple persons? Most of the names are derived from Sanskrit and hence have a meaning behind it. For instance "Vishnu" just means "the all pervading one" (So, why can't Shiva or any other "God" be a "Vishnu"?) and Ram(a:) means "one who is pleasing (to others)". And the name in focus, Ravan(a), means "crying" or "one who makes others cry". So, could it be that there were (and are) several Ravan(a)s?
2. Was it just a figure of speech at many of these references? My mother often used to say "I have told you this a thousand times.. " I respond to her saying "No, this is the third time actually" :P
3. The earliest definition of year (defined as the time it takes for earth to go around its orbit) is around 7th and 8th century BC. Could it be that the word "year" meant some other time scale in these older references? People from Krita yuga (a phase in Earth) supposedly lived for 1000s of years. What definition of "year" are they using?

Perhaps not without reason they say "ageless" epics :)

Can "we" come out of opinion based politics?

(Written mostly from an Indian perspective)

Region based politics (such as the left front in the NE and Kerala), caste based politics (too many examples to list), language based politics (such as the ones in TN), religion based politics (Hindutva and non-hindutva. Parties who call themselves secular just seem to be non-hindutva in my opinion. If you encourage a reservation system based on religion then you cease to be secular, right?. Reservation was provided in the constitution for demographic groups that were structurally oppressed and it was not based on religion. Anyway reservation system is a different argument altogether) and now we have been bitten by opinion based politics. 

Politics is a very difficult area. And on top of that it is murky. I have always believed that politicians are some of the smartest people on earth. Once they get a powerful position their objective is to maximize their wealth before the next election. Most of them succeed in accomplishing this simple objective. Of course, stuff happens in between. People criticize. People blame, threaten, protest and a majority remain quiet. They are all immaterial. A politician gets the job done. Personal job I mean.

To win an election is no easy task in the first place. Having contested an election at an extremely small scale at IIT, I have a vague idea of what it takes. You can come up with an extremely attractive, practical and useful manifesto. You can spend hours convincing the voters that you will get things done. Those just don't matter. Ultimately many voters don't care who you are. Some have their own agenda. Some have already made their decision, choices that are mostly personal. Some are just not going to turn up for voting anyways. At whatever scale the elections happen more or less the above trend is true.

Why are these choices personal and pre-determined? In other words, why are most votes mostly based on our opinions and not facts or extensive analysis? Why are we so impressionable? For instance, most of you who are reading this blog will fall into one of the following categories:

A. Believe in AAP and want it to succeed
B. Used to believe AAP but have now given up on AAP
C. Think that AAP is just like another political party and has a few tricks up its sleeve
D. AAP - kya AAP.. humko aap vap nahin malum saab

Some of us do wait and watch and our patience is running out with every new article. But most of us just follow what the herd says and blindly believe what the news reports say. "Oh yes, AAP is useless" or "Oh yes, AAP is fantastic". We just don't put thoughts to the reports and on top of that do not accept that we are so impressionable. A simple proof is the fact that both AAP supporters and haters (or non-believers) exist among the literate. Surely, one of them is being misled? I'm scared at this. If educated people cannot (or do not have the time to) fully analyze and come to a decision based on facts, it puts a huge pressure on a genuine political party (if any exists) to change people's opinions. I don't see any difference between us and a guy who has been voting for ADMK (a party started by a movie star in Tamil Nadu) for time immemorial just because he was a huge fan of the cine star who started the party (and who is no more). At least the latter's mind does not waver much.

Jai Hind!

An entry to a Hindu temple for the 'first' time

It is astonishing how we take many things for granted. We somehow assume that they will be available for us for ever, just like they are available right now. We don't realize that even if we have money, we might still get into a situation where the things we want, though material, may not be there for us. And then there are small yet beautiful things around us, which we fail to appreciate, and worse still ignore! That lack of appreciation continues in many other aspects including a visit to the temple. Most of us go to a temple because we have a need or we seek a solution for a problem, that is presumably beyond our capacity. Our mind is clouded with thoughts and insecurity. So, every time we step in to a temple, we fail to notice the beautiful, exquisite aspects. The carvings, the sculptures, the aroma, the stillness in the air, flowers (natural and otherwise) looking more beautiful amidst their relatives, the steady flame of a lamp devoid of its occasional flicker, a devotee lost in thoughts, the vibrations and the reverberations in the air from a powerful prayer, a child trying to imitate its parents, an infant curious about where it is and so on. It is not about being artistic but the eye "sees" only what the mind intends to.

A temple is where a 'God' is or where the presence of 'Divine' can be felt. And so, here I imagine myself visiting a 'Hindu' temple for the 'first' time trying to flush out all my prior notions of a temple.

As soon as you arrive at the temple, more than a welcome sign, the first sign to greet you will be "no shoes beyond this point" or something similar. Most temples are pretty strict about this. So, before you see all the nice things inside a temple you will be forced to see shoes at different life stages*. Once you enter the temple, the first thing that catches one's attention will be the numerous statues, some sitting, some standing and some even reclining. But at least all of them will be complete from head to toe and mostly no busts. Some are carved from stone (be it marble or granite), some modeled (from clay) and some even casted (from copper or bronze). And on a fleeting inquiry all will happen to be 'Gods', not just different forms but also different names with different stories. In most cases, the sculptures are such that an attempted "high five" moment is frozen mid way. The idols are not giving the devotees any "high-five". It's understood as an act of "blessing".

A closer look at these sculptures will also reveal that the sculptures are portrayed with as many super human features as the number of human aspects they show. Some will have two hands, some four and some even 16! You may also see some super human yogic poses which are almost impossible to mimic and some poses beyond imagination. Such as, a woman sitting on a lotus flower with a musical instrument. Either the lotus must be quite monstrous or the woman must be ultra-light! Or maybe, it is the power of levitation. Each sculpture is decorated in a unique way, some with jewels, some with flowers and in short, the sculptures are dressed up and look like adorable barbie dolls. Still, a typical devotee will come in front of the statue and close one's eyes! I mean why? If the sole purpose of coming in front of the idol is closing one's eyes, can't it be done without coming near the statue and sitting in a corner at the temple? ;) The animated looks of the idols is actually a stark contrast to the idols (if they exist at all) in many other religions. The smiling face (an ardent devotee will call it grace) does lift your spirits. 

Then there are various animals and birds and reptiles, not real ones but replicas of course, that one can see, almost like pets in front of each idol. From lion, tiger, snake, bull, peacock, parrot, bald eagle and even a rat! You might almost think that you are in some sort of a zoo/museum. Call it harmony with the nature or something more. Historically, people have tried to worship on account of two reasons - Love and Fear. Was it the fear of these animals (lion, snake, bull) or love (peacock, parrot) will be an interesting analysis.

Some idols are also too complex to understand. Neither animal nor human. There is this elephant headed human (Ganesha), lion headed human (Narasimha) and someone who looks like the holder of a Mr. Universe title. Six pack and all! Face of a monkey, body of a human with a tail and a mace to add (Hanuman). It is actually interesting to see how Hanuman has been portrayed physically stronger and stronger especially as one moves from the South of India to the North.

If you stay long enough or look closely enough, you should also be able to spot the curator for this "museum" (aka priest). He not only takes care of the sculptures, but mostly also the man behind the decorations. He also appears to "talk" to these sculptures from time to time in a language that even a typical devotee cannot understand. Maybe that is why, this language is called God's language (De(i)va basha)! Typically, the healthier and happier the curator looks the wealthier and majestic the temple is.

So, the next time you go to a "temple", spend a few minutes appreciating the nuances. The experience, I promise, only gets richer :)

Much of the temple context can be understood through this quote from Bhagwat Gita:
yo yo yāṃ yāṃ tanuṃ bhaktaḥ śraddhayārcitum icchati
tasya tasyācalāṃ śraddhāṃ tām eva vidadhāmy aham 7.21
In whichever shape a devotee with faith wishes to worship,
To such a one I give his steadfast faith

*People's strategy seems to be simple: The shoes and sandals cannot be flaunted and have to be left behind anyway. So, the higher the life stage, lower are the chances that somebody can become jealous of your pair and exchange it for theirs. The (sometimes intentional) swapping of foot companions is so common that many temples have a "shoe room" similar to the cloak room concept. The shoe rooms may actually make some business as well. Not that people are too fond of their foot companions. But I think it is going to be rather awkward to be without them after the visit, even if only for a few minutes.

Why Sachin does (not) deserve the Bharat Ratna

Bharat Ratna is the highest civilian award conferred by India. It literally means "jewel of India". So, one who is conferred this award must be someone who India must be proud of. Has Sachin made India proud?

Legend: F - For and A - Against

F: Obviously! Cricket is a game popularized by the English and as of now no English player has scored more than 10 thousand runs. Sachin has almost twice the number of runs the highest English player has scored!

A: That only says how frequently the game is played. So, how many countries play cricket?

F: It is quite popular in about 10-15 countries.

A: Out of about 200 odd countries right?

F: Well, if you are hinting at cricket not being global, how global is Carnatic music and Indian music? MS Subbulakshmi and Lata Mangeshkar have also been conferred this award.

A: And this game cricket, seems like it's full of controversies these days? Fixing, ball tampering, doctored pitches and other forms of corruption?

F: Maybe but you cannot blame Sachin for the game being corrupt.

A: The point is, it is a muddy sport and he was part of the era. Can you categorically say that he has not been involved in any scams?

F: Well, nothing has come out as of now. We all believe that he is an honest man. But the point is Sachin is a household name for a billion people!

A: India's population may be 1.2 billion. But the number of infants/children who I am sure don't know about cricket are around 150 million. And I'm sure there are quite a few woman who don't care about cricket. And even among cricket fans I hear that there are a few Sachin bashers. So a billion? Really?

F: Ok, that was an exaggeration. But he has the largest fan following in India..

A: Hang on, better than all the political leaders?

F: I meant in sports..

A: I see .. Is he the best indisputably?

F: May not the best in the world but definitely the best in India.

A: Better than Kapil Dev, Gavaskar and other legends?

F: Well, I meant batsmen. But let's not make comparisons. All these legends that you mention have utmost respect for him and consider him the best in business.

A: Gavaskar is not going to say "I'm better than Sachin". Anyway, so be it. Let Sachin be the best cricketer, not sportsman, India has produced. But you still have not answered the key question. Has he made India proud?

F: This an award given to personalities that India thinks are its jewels. If you look at the list of awardees most were freedom fighters and politicians.

A: I can understand freedom fighters. Politicians? So, it seems to have some political motivations too?

F: Well, maybe.. Rajiv Gandhi was the youngest to get this award before Sachin. Politicians have served the nation.

A: Served the nation. hmmm.. I see.. So, Sachin has served the nation? How exactly?

F: Well, they tweaked the definition. It used to be an award given for public service and achievements in arts and science. But now they extended it to include performance in any human endeavor.

A: Any human endeavor.. Interesting. So, a software professional, a laundry man and why even a janitor may also be eligible..

F: Err.. technically it looks like.. yes..

A: So, he did not serve the nation.. and only a majority think he was the best..

F: Well, it's not just about his talents. It was the feel good factor that he brought to his fans. It was the hope he gave. They were proud of his achievements. Beyond that it was his commitment, the way he conducted himself, his humility and..

A: Let me ask you this question. What do you think should be the motive in giving this highest civilian award?

F: I guess to motivate an ordinary civilian ..

A: Exactly! Millions of youngsters are already watching this sport and possibly wasting time. Thousands choose cricket as their vocation and lose their way. By giving this award to Sachin, is the nation helping itself? Let the cricketers and fanatic cricket fans celebrate Sachin. Sports in India is already in bad shape. We forgot hockey legends like Dhyan Chand. By stooping low to vox populi and celebrating Sachin with the highest civilian award, I think India has got its priorities wrong!

Following Sachinism and being a Sachinist

"Is he going to sub you, is he going to study for you?" yelled my mother. "What's so different? Does he play with his bum?" mocked my advisor. Insane, madness - people could say. They just cannot understand, I would say, and move on.

This article is not about Sachin. Not about numbers. Not about records. Many have written about him, his humility and about his numerous feats. I doubt if I can add even a word more. This is about myself, the Sachin side. So, ideally it should have been in my diary. But that is Sachinism you see. It will be in the open.

I don't remember watching any cricket till 1996. That still surprises me, given that my father follows cricket. The lack of a TV possibly explains part of it. It was around 96 World Cup that I started following cricket. And quite soon got addicted. First it was cricket and then it was Sachin. With Sachin, "addicted" is too weak an adjective.

I had no idea what swing was. What seam was. What a flipper was. I knew only pace and spin bowling and that 6 per over or a strike rate of 100 is a difficult task. I kept cricket simple. Sachin taught me it was not. If it was a simple game, why did he just stand out? Why can't others do the same thing he does? What makes it difficult for them? And slowly I learned about the game and the more I understood, the more I was awed by Sachin.

At home, Sachin always created scrambles in our hall. When Sachin was batting and something else was on TV (a serial, cartoon or a movie), I literally had to fight for my right and fight I did to catch a glimpse of him. The previous channel button in the remote was so helpful! Every time I pressed it, I will receive a stare from my mother or a scream from my sister as the case maybe.  Luckily there were enough seconds between balls, between overs and there was another batsman along with Sachin who also faced occasionally. You see, these were the times, I would let them watch their stuff.

Then there were calculations. 80 more runs required to win, 52 runs for Sachin's 100. Will curse the other batsmen if they score too quickly. Forget the win. Forget the caliber of the other batsmen. Only one thing seemed to matter when Sachin was batting. It is a phenomenon that is hard to explain. Cricket, they say, is a team game. Not when Sachin is batting, for me. I even pray for the opposition to post a decent score to give Sachin enough runs to score a 100. Rubbish - I know. I always try to catch a glimpse of even a solitary boundary he had hit in his innings in the highlights package. Nonsense - I know.

Waking up at 5 AM just to watch him bat in Australia, waking up at 2 AM watching him bat at New Zealand, staying up all night in Hawaii watching him bat in South Africa. Memories simply galore. The nights before many term exams were spent watching him bat. Even my academics took a balcony seat when it comes to Sachin performance. Well, highlights package existed. But it was just not the same.

I have been preparing for Sachin's retirement since 2005, I should say. Closely following Ponting and Kallis' records to see if they will surpass him. Can Sachin last longer than them or just enough to ensure he will be on top? Age calculations, average calculations, test match frequency, forecasts... How does it matter? Somehow they did. And survived he did! And how!

How much ever Sachin accomplished, the requests never ended. Can he do well in the Finals after 98? Yes, he answered, in Australia. Can he do well in the 4th innings while chasing? There it was against England. Somehow every success of his was a check mark in MY list. It made me feel good. Even my grand mother was surprised. "Sachin Sachin Sachin, Do your work" she will affectionately chide.

Who after Sachin - is a question that I have been trying to answer. Sehwag? Ah! He is not even in the team now a days. Dhoni? Kohlis and Dhawans? Nay! They all seem to be performers whom I would at best watch in highlights. That's about it.

Sachin will always remain a phenomenon that I could never explain. With his retirement, a childhood in me has retired too.

P.S - Please keep away your comments on the timing of his retirement. I believe, it his personal decision that none of us have a say on. Whether he should have been dropped is a selection committee's decision. Discussions on both of these topics would simply not be encouraged. 

How much does crowd matter in sports?

Each of us have a preference to a particular sport. And each sport requires a specialized set of skills. But there seems to be one common link across many outdoor sports. The audience, the crowd. As the gladiator thumb rule says "You win the crowd, you win your freedom". Here are a few instances that I can remember when the crowd played a significant role in the game (in no particular order). The recent Wimbledon Final triggered me to wrap this post which I actually started a few months before! 

Tennis:
Fedex vs Djoko - 2012 Wimbledon Semi-Final
Not quite as epic as that  (2008) Wimbledon Final, which remains one of my favorites till today. But, this 2012 Semi-Final was also epic by a lot of criteria. Unfortunately, Djokovic was then too at the receiving end of the crowd. This was a match in which a fading Federer overcame a rising Djokovic. Almost unthinkable at the time of the match. Federer showed his class and the crowd chipped in as well. Each point won by Federer drew a bigger cheer and applause than that of Djoker's. Three out of four sets of pure genius. I think Federer just took a break during the second set :P.

Fedex vs Simon - 2013 French Open
Probably an insignificant match. But consider this - Simon is French and it was a 5 setter with Federer who was perhaps not at his best in 2013. In fact, he eventually lost in the Quarters to Tsonga. Did the crowd help him get to the Quarters at least? :) Simon was left ruing the fact that the crowd was so partisan. The homeboy tag was just on paper, the home crowd wanted their own favorite to win.

Martina Hingis vs Steffi Graf - 1999 French Open final
Monica Seles perhaps bore the most severe brunt from a fan, but there was another notable one. Though I never saw/followed this match live, the reports I read years later made me feel how much the crowd can get to you! This was a match that had Hingis' name written on it. But the crowd, partly instigated by Hingis' behavior on court, decided to re-write it. Hingis never again could manage to reach a French Open finals and ended up not being able to complete a career slam!

Cricket:
When it comes to cricket, wherever India goes, the crowd is mostly behind India and in huge numbers too. There are several instances I could give, so much so that the crowd is often called the 12th man for India! 2011 World cup that happened in the Indian subcontinent definitely warrants a mention. But here is the one that will remain in my memory for quite sometime!
Ind vs SA - 2nd Test at Eden Gardens, Kolkata
Eden Gardens is famous for the crowd's involvement (both good and bad) and it is the largest stadium in India and easily the largest in the world if you account for the extra seats on trees, roofs of nearby buildings and so on. The series had an interesting prelude. India was then ranked #1 and SA #2. India cleverly invited SA for a 2 test match series to strengthen its current position. But the plan backfired as it lost the first one by a big margin. So, the situation was like - If they fail to win the 2nd test match, the #1 tag will be gone. Just as it looked like the shutters were down on Day 1, the turn around began. The SA batsmen were facing two bowlers at the same time, the bowler and the crowd! Many batsmen walked in and were clueless like a deer in front of the headlights. It was a sensational come back in my opinion. India retained the #1 tag and Bhajji, egged by the crowd, performed too! 

Boxing: Ali vs Foreman - Rumble in the Jungle
If you haven't seen the documentary, I suggest you do! The match, well known for the tactics employed by Ali more than many other things, also gave us the famous quote "I will fly like a butterfly and sting like a bee". But a less popular quote was "Ali booma ye (Ali kill him)" by Ali's fans or rather people who Ali made his fans. Foreman was clueless as to why the crowd was so partisan. Around that time, it was physically impossible for someone to hold Foreman in a match, forget winning against him. Ali did it and did it with style but not without the egging and cries of the crowd. Simply phenomenal and a story that makes you think fairytales could have been true!

The role of crowd is probably limited in F1 (or most races), golf and some other sport, in particular, where technique and concentration is more important than power. So, crowd is of little help in these sports. But where it matters, I think it matters big! The extra adrenalin, the extra energy and the boost that the crowd is capable of infusing is just so invaluable! If you consider life as a sport, we do have a big audience. But, looks like a cheer will go a long way too unless of course we rely on 'technique' and 'concentration' :)

If you have enjoyed any such event that remains memorable, please do share it in the comments! Thanks!

Trivia: Turkish fans hold the Guinness record for the loudest cheer, unfortunately for what ended up as a losing cause.

P.S. Methodical research on a similar topic is of course available. The interested may refer to Thirer and Rampey, 1979; Courneya and Carron, 1992; Agnew & Carron, 1994; Nevill, Newell and Gale, 1996;  Morley and Thomas, 2005; Polman et al 2007.

Why my car is a 'child' for me :P

Maintaining a car is like maintaining an elephant if you are lucky and a dinosaur if you are not :P

When I was in school, I was dreaming of a career in medicine. I ended up 'choosing' mechanical engineering though. So, when I had to carry an engineering drafter, I used to compare it with a stethoscope. While unlikely, I have still not ruled out a career for myself in medicine :P. But the analogies keep coming at me. We all must have had or seen moments where a patient tries to tell the doctor what is wrong with him and what needs to be done, only for the doctor to quip "Are you the doctor or am I? Just tell me the symptoms. I will then tell you what to do". A similar thing happened to me with a mechanic. I took my prev(c)ious car to a mechanic and told him "The EGR valve needs to be replaced. Can you help me do it?". The mechanic said something like "Am I your servant? I don't do what you say. I am the mechanic. Just tell me what the problem is". It is a different story that he later on agreed that the EGR valve indeed has to be replaced. So, here is my attempt to draw more such analogies of how a car can be so "human" in a world where we see humans becoming so mechanical!

For starters conceiving a car is no small matter. With the loads of choices in front of you, one can seriously get a headache. Should you adopt one (second hand cars) or make new? ;) When taking them out, cars are like babies who need continuous monitoring, attention and care. Take for instance the requirement that you always have to hold its hand (steering wheel I mean). Sometimes just a touch but sometimes with utmost care.

Once you own a car, you have to change its napkins every now and then.  Well I mean the oil and oil filter. Either you can do it by yourself making your hands 'dirty' or ask a granny to do it for you (mechanic). But it just had to be done. You can postpone it, but you better do it! And there are its nostrils (air filters) that will need occasional replacement. I wonder why we don't take the pain of cleaning these filters. Use and toss culture is not surprisingly different between the two napkins you see!

As the car reaches adolescence, just like pimples, dimples appear on your car. Sometimes you wonder from where they came from. Stones from the road chipping your car sides, nuts/acorn falling from a tree and the 'clever' guy who had parked next door and opens his door ajar, oblivious to the car that is parked next to his (hers) - are all responsible for those dimples (dings) on your car. Anti-aging, skin care creams are available (paint protection) to enhance the looks of your car as it grows old.

Cars in fact suffer from quarter life crisis too. As soon as the manufacturer's warranty ends, you will inevitably have a few maintenance issues crop up. Their shoes (tires) get worn out too. But at least they don't keep changing their sizes! And then their eyes (headlights) can suffer from corneal dystrophy  (faded headlight lenses) and their knees (shock absorbers / struts / suspension) might need a knee cap replacement as it ages, but once done will be up and running like a child!

They put on weight as they age (decreased mileage = more fuel needed), lowering their efficiency. But analogies apart, personally I have observed that if you treat your car with respect, it does return the favor to you in more than one way. I am reminded of this joke piece that I read somewhere sometime:

A heart surgeon went to a mechanic to repair his car. The mechanic opened the hood and started his diagnosis. While he was at it, he started chatting with the surgeon, "Hey doc, so you see, there isn't much of a difference between you and me. If you think of the engine as the heart, then I do operate on the heart, check the valves, replace it if needed. Pretty much whatever you do. Then how come people treat you with more respect and you get all the big bucks?". The surgeon calmly replied, "Try doing it when the engine is running!".

P.S. The following is for people with Mech / Auto Engineering background and with a little knowledge of biology. Many are debatable. Sometimes I used function as the criteria and sometimes structure.
Tear glands = wiper fluid, Strokes of the engine = systole and diastole of human heart, Engine Control Unit = Nervous system, Air intake mechanism, filters = Lungs/respiratory system, Transmission / Lubrication / Coolant systems = Circulatory / Perspiratory systems, Timing parts (cam shafts and timing belt) = Bile secretions in stomach :P, Catalytic converters / EGR = kidney, Anesthesia = disconnect the terminals of the battery.