New time or proper time

Heart To Heart

By Dr. Muhammad Hafizullah

“What time is the meeting?” asked Abdul Hameed.  "Ten thirty as mentioned in the letter!" I replied in a straight tone. "New time or proper time?" he asked again. "There is only one time and that is the proper time," I tried to teach him a new lesson. "I don't know; we pray by the old time, we sleep by the old time and wake up by old time but if you insist I will come for the meeting according to 'Sarkari' time," he rubbed in.

Only yesterday the Imam announced that the timing of Aser prayers had been changed from 6 pm to 5.45pm. And we were all looking at each other as for most of us it should have been 7 pm to 6.45pm. One of us dared to remind him and he answered, "we prefer sticking to old time, as time is bound to change again and it is difficult for us to understand the new time!"  Is it really difficult to understand the new time? May be yes! I myself became the victim of the new controversy as I was in the mosque along with my son an hour before the time while cursing other people for not being punctual for prayers.

In our rural areas most people found it difficult to accept the change, hence they stuck to the old time. Where as in big cities, people complied with the change, dwellers of smaller cities and villages dug in their heels and refused to change the time. Why is it that we found it difficult to conform to change, which is a norm everywhere else in the world? They are at war with themselves, should they change the lifelong habit of having dinner after Isha prayers or be among one of those who 'go to bed late'.

They are in conflict with their own defined standards. They have been asked to make major changes in life at a very late junction of life where they cannot even appreciate what the whole exercise is about?  

One of my friends is particularly happy about the confusion created by the new time controversy.

He has found a perfectly legitimate excuse to miss important meetings and appointments by one to two hours.

On enquiry he confided that most meetings start one hour late anyway, so he takes the liberty of arriving two hours late -mostly when the meeting is being wrapped up and decisions have been made to have another meeting to finalise the decisions. His modus operandi is simple; on arriving late he dons a very simple appearance and asks, "Oh I thought you meant 'the old -real time'!"

In the West, their lives revolve around their work and most important times are nine and five.

They have to be at work at nine in morning and finish work by five in evening. Life organises herself around these two pillars. And most importantly everyone sets to new time without asking any questions. The transition is smooth and it works well with them.

Their sleeping time and wake up time does not change as the reference remains the same and by and large lighting hours change only a little. Clock changes almost simultaneously allover Europe so it seems like tiding in the same wave.

People are calling the new hours by derogatory terms like 'Sirkari' (Government) time or by the names of our rulers. Some remember it as a foreign time. But most refer to it as 'not real' time as against the old real time.

In our primitive societies we have many allegedly 'second class' or 'fake things' like self-proclaimed dishonest leaders, covetous politicians, spurious drugs and impure edibles - mixed with innumerable powders. Only a few things are now left which are supposed to be 'real' and unadulterated.

One of the things which remained out of the clutches of our avarice politicians was 'time'. And now even that has become 'controversial and debatable'.

Conversations now start with merits and demerits of new time! Emotions run very high as arguments are countered by more heated arguments and the final point of agreement is 'this too will pass'.

The proponents argue that by changing clock one can 'supposedly' save energy meaning electricity.

The opponent is waiting for this and puts up a cynical smile and scoffs, "Oh really?" "What do you save by changing clock?" he asks to push the proponent to the wall. "If people put on lights later by one hour so much of energy can be saved!" and to sound more credible add a figure in kilo or mega watts to it. "Yes, one could save electricity if 'there was electricity' but with the unending and unscheduled load shedding - there is no electricity so there is nothing to save!" he concludes the final argument.

Many people are having the best of both worlds! They appear at work according to the real time and pack up for home according to new time.

They have devised the new method of shortening their day by two hours. They have hundreds of reasons to report late and another score of reasons to disappear early from work. My driver finds it very difficult to come to work as he quotes the old time but is perfectly happy to call it a day according to new time. Some exceptions like us report for work according to new time and leave for home as per old times increasing our working day by a few hours.

Ask anyone in the street, "what is the time?" and another question is fired at you, "new or proper?" I try to note time on patients' watches as I conduct my clinical examination. Most have not bothered to change their watches. They still stick to their old ideas and time. But problems arise when they insist on being seen according to their selected time. They are least bothered if they miss appointment by a couple of hours under the pretext of new versus old time.

The consensus of opinion on the changed time is that it does not help save energy as there is nothing to save in the first place! But it has given us a new controversy and a new topic to debate and differ! In the current polarized society, it has given us a new subject to deliberate and differ!

But then who needs another topic, in the presence of so many calamities hitting the country and the baffled people at the present time, like load-shedding, insecurity, petrol bomb, diesel price-hike, CNG rocketing price, inefficiency of the institutions and most importantly unprecedented price-hike of edibles coupled with non-availability of flour.