Walking the Inka Trail

by Wilailak Saraithong on Sunday, August 19, 2012 at 11:33am ·

PublicFriendsOnly MeCustomClose FriendsFamilySee all lists...AcquaintancesGo Back

Aug. 13, 2012

The Inka trail starts at kilometer 82 from Cusco, from here the train goes on to Aquas Galientes, the last town before Machu Picchu.  The train goes along the Urubamba River but the Inka trail goes around the mountains on the other side from the river.  The first day we walked mainly on a dirt path through a few villages. Lunch was a surprise, there was a dining tent with tables and chairs; we sat down to lunch of soup and main course served by a cute uniformed butler.  Meals were like this through out the trek.  

Inka ruins dot this valley which the Inkas call the Sacred Valley.  The Urubamba River snakes through the low, steep valley.  The Inkas believed that the river was a reflection of the Milky Way in the sky.  In the morning we spotted a riuns called Q'Anabamba far on the other side of the river.  Many of the ruins such as this one were stations to check the comings and goings of the people or storage for food, clothes, or weapons.

Later in the day and high up by a lookout, we viewed another site called Q'Entimarka (Patallaqta).  All the Inka place names are in Quechuan language, the language of the Quechua, which are Andean people.  The Inkas, on the other hand, were royalty of these people, so mark the difference.  The Inka towns were self-sufficient agricultural towns populated by royalty, priests, astronomers, engineers, and other highly knowleageable persons.  They usually consist of residence areas, sometimes temples, other scientific buildings such as sun dial (which tells the days and months raher than the time of day), and terrace agricultural areas.  

The first day was a nice walk and we camped a little high up from the bottom of the valley.  The camp site had a public toilet but no shower.  By the time we reached the camp, all the tents were pitched and the sleeping pads laid out in the tent.  We each got a bowl of water right by our tent for wash up, another surprise luxury. Maximilian was the wash guy through out the trek.  He would bring the water, had liquid soap and paper towel handy for us to dry our hands.  After the delicious dinner, I slept from 9 to 11 when I went out to the toilet and after that sleep failed me, maybe it was the altitude ?  

Q'Entimarka (Patallaqta)

Aug. 14, 2012

Today was the toughest walk of the 4 days, and the most difficult walk for me because we had to go through Dead Woman Pass at 4,200 meters.  I found the name of the pass a very bad omen as I was the last one to go through that pass.  Higher than 3,500 meters, I had hard time breathing.  We started the climb after breakfast, around 6:30-7:00.  The terrain was high plateau, the mountains were mighty and treeless, their peaks piercing through the clouds.

Apparentaly the name of the pass comes from the contour of the pass from the other side, it is supposed to look like a women lying with the breats jutting up, frankly I was able to imagine only the one breast.  But really why not Lying Woman Pass, noone has to be dead.  After we finished climbing up, it was going down on the stone steps, today everyone had knee support on.  On this day we had not one pass but 2, the second one came right after we reached the bottom of the first, this one was 3,800 meters, not as bad but after 3,500 I was puffing away again.  Right before we reached the second pass, there was another nice riuns called Runkuracay.  It looked like a fortress but the guide told us that along the Inka road there were stations such as this one for storage.  The Inkas used the trail for communication in the former times.  There would be messengers/runners who took messages between Cusco to Machu Picchu.  It took these messengers 5-6 hours to run up and down the mountains and completed what we needed 4 days to do.  The ruins along the Inka trail served as storage for food, clothes, and weapons for these messengers as well. 

Dead Woman Pass

Runkuracay

Before we reached our second camp, we past 2-3 more ruins, but there was no time to visit them as today was a long day and we didn't want to reach the camp in the dark.

Phuyupatamarka

This camp was on top of a smaller mountain and was surrounded by 360 degrees of higher peaks.  We had the whole sky to ourselves and the stars were pretty spectacular at night.  It was cold outside but we were warm in our tent and I slept much better this night.

Aug. 15, 2012

The third morning, again we woke up at 5:30, apparently to skip mosquitos which come with the sun.  Today it was a very nice and not-tiring walk.  We were now on the other side of the mountains where the climate was more rain forest.  But as now was a dry season, we didn't encounter any rain.  There were trees and beautiful plants to behold along the path which was leveled by the side of the mountains.  We were literally walking by the clouds, it was wonderful.

By our camp, only 5-minute walk, there  was the beautiful Winaywayna or Little Machu Picchu.  It had steep agricultural terrace and some stone buildings.  The place was tugged by the side of a mountain and was peaceful.  This was the last camp site before Machu Picchu and it was crowded.  From our tents looking out, we saw the Urubamba River down below and was able to see part of the town of Aquas Galientes.

Winaywayna

Aug. 16, 2012

Today was the day we would reach Machu Picchu.  We had to wake up at 3:30 and walked 5 minutes to the check point to wait until 5:30 when they opened.  Then it was a nice 2-hour walk to the Sun Gate.  This was a structure on top of a mountain and it was the first location where Machu Picchu could be viewed.  It was right down there at only 2,800 meters, with the morning clouds that sometimes obscured the whole structure.  The site of Machu Picchu from the Sun Gate is what most trekkers treasure; it is the angle we often see from magazines or tourist brochures.  If you visit Machu Picchu by train, you don't get to see this view with your own eyes, unless you walk up more than 1-hour walk to near the Sun Gate.

Machu Picchu, from half way between the Sun Gate and the site.

We reached the site at around 9 am.  Had a tour of the place for 2 hours.  It is undertood that Machu Picchu was a temple of the sun (there was a temple of the moon, temple of the rainbow with 7 windows, etc).  On solstice the first ray of the sun passes through the Sun Gate to the central stone in the main temple.  The location of the Inka towns were also very well planned astrologically.  They also take up shape of certain sacred animals such as condor, puma (Cusco), crocodile (the main elongated part of Machu Picchu), etc.  The Inka's knowlege was far beyond peoples of their times and that made them godlike rulers.  The conquest of the Spaniards over the Inkas put an end to this magnificent civilization, but that is totally another story, no?

Social Values, Stereotypes, or plain being Stigmatized?

Today a colleague asked me to look at the questions she wrote for an exam.  I assumed from the questions it was an exam on philosophy or something akin to it.  The questions were about the walk of Ajarn Pramuan Pengchan, a former philosophy teacher at Faculty of Humanities, CMU, who became famous for walking the country with nothing on him.  One question asks why Ajarn Pramuan did not carry any money on his "walk of life"?

After I got home, the question was still in my head.  What bothered me I learned was that I was comparing him to any Thai woman who would want to do the same kind of walk.  What is a chance of a Thai female walking through the country without money, without things which we usually "carry" in order to survive in our life?  I think it would be very difficult for a woman to walk the country by herself, without any resources on her.  

First of all, would it be safe for her to go any road she wants to? What if she is walking at night?  Wouldn't it be risky for her?  She could be hurt, raped or even killed? If such things happen, people wouldn't be surprised.  But Ajarn Pramuan, who is a man, can do this.  He has not much to worry in terms of safety.

Secondly, how could she feed herself?  Of course she can go to any door and ask.  But what would this look like to the host?  A deranged woman or an imposter?  Would they trust her enough to open their door to hear her story?

Thirdly, even if the host is brave enough to open their door and listen to her story--I'm contemplating about life through my walk--what would they think of her?  Whose wife is this?  whose daughter?  What a pity?  Something must be wrong with her, with her family, with--there's always something that goes wrong.  Who would take her seriously, the way people take Ajarn Pramuan?  Who would tolerate or accept her idiosyncrasy? Who would indulge her?  When a man does it, he is unique, he is special, he is very deep.  But would people say the same thing for a woman?

Don't get me wrong, I love what Ajarn Pramuan accomplishes through his idea of walking.  I'm just using his case to prove a point about our perception of what are expected of Thai women.  I don't think in general Thai women are oppressed but certain images of Thai women and the level of acceptance of what we do still fall short.

If you love your mother, your sisters, your aunts, your female teachers, remember that they, like their male counterpart, can be strange (because they are interesting); they can be stubborn (because the are self-confident); they can be out-of-this world (because they are creative); they can be emotional (because they are considerate), and they can make your life fulfilled--because they are women!

Selfishness

Today I had a British visitor in my "British and American Cultures" class and students were asking him questions to learn more about the British culture. One student asked about how older people were treated in England these days and our guest said not very well as they were usually put in the home and most often were not visited much by their children. The student asked why that was the case and our visitor said he thought people in the modern urban environment were quite selfish; they had no time to spend with their elders or they didn't want to. They may be more occupied with work, hectic lifestyle, technology, etc.



This got me thinking about being selfish. As a matter of fact I have been thinking about being selfish for some time now. Is it true that people in this age and time are more selfish than in the past? Are there legitimate reasons why we become more selfish? Are we to blame for being selfish? These days we want more time to ourselves, to Facebook (ironically alone but with others), to play computer games, to chat (again by ourselves yet with others), to do our errands, to finish work (after work hours), etc. We dread it when relatives from other provinces visit unannounced; this is very inconvenient, we say to ourselves, it's a lot of work to have relatives over at your house. Is it true that modern lifestyle excludes us from real people?



What surprises me is not that we may be more selfish but that it is quite easy for us to be selfish. We are comfortable being selfish. Some religious beliefs might contribute to us being ok with being selfish. Does not Buddhism teach us to get rid of all burdens--even our children are seen in a sense as burdens; they trap us with the secular joy. Buddhism teaches us to free ourselves--each individual person--from all the burdens and worldly traps, individual, not you and your family, or you and your spouse. When you leave this world you go alone, it is only when you live you are with people in your life.



In essence, we are more "individual" than we can imagine. We are all "islands," separate entities from others around us. The human ties we cultivate through our life are thus rather fictional; we create them because that's what our parents, our teachers, our society teach us to do. It is what human beings have been doing since the days of the cave men. Anthropologists, scientists, and many other --ists say human beings are social animals, we must live in flocks. They tell us that social ties are essential to our well beings. Isn't all this too confusing? Spiritually we should be alone (selfish) while socially we should be part of groups.



I might be crazy but I think these opposite ideas of how we live life is the origin of our headaches. We get unhappy or worried when we miss out on group activities or ones which involve people. We feel bad when we spend time by ourselves because we use the social rules as our criteria. If we use spiritual rules as our guides, we would feel natural to be alone, to care for only ourselves--to be selfish. I know this is scandalous, this is plain selfish. But hey, I am only a very confused human being.


February 1, 2011

Thongsiri Vihara Makes News

Less than a week ago we saw a Facebook post about an 100+ years old vihara (main hall) of a remote village temple called
Thongsiri under a threat of being demolished. Most people were concerned because it was ancient and beautiful in a simple way. The post said the villagers wanted to have it torn down on February 4, 2011. Being advocates of cultural heritage, I and 3 friends drove to the temple this afternoon (Jan. 30, 2011). We found the pleasant little temple nestled in a small valley. The whole compound is a little over one rai of land. In a hall by the south gate we saw villagers, middle-aged to elderly, working on the preparation of a northern ritual of life blessing (suebchata) to be held on February 4, 2011. The abbot greeted us and
started talking about the Facebook post with us. Apparently the post has stirred interest from the authority and now the demolishing plan is being halted until after the discussion between Department of Fine Arts and the local people scheduled
for February 3, 2011.

The vihara is actually very small and its construction was completed only about 50 or so years ago. The claim that it was 130 years old is based on perhaps the first days bricks were laid on the premise, probably for PR purpose. The architecture is not that outstanding but it is simple and thus charming. Of course I would want something this beautiful to stay but the story we heard from the abbot was also heart-rending. After I heard the story, I don’t know what to think or which side to take up.

The village consists of devout Buddhists and the temple is alive with people making merits on a regular basis and holding on tightly to Buddhist rituals. At the gate, we saw slippers being left by it, outside of the temple grounds--a tradition we don’t see anymore in town temples. As a matter of fact, I learned today that Buddhists in the former times usually did this. Nowadays we leave our shoes before we enter temple buildings but not outside the temple. The villagers love their temple and their vihara. It is only because it’s in a bad shape that they decided it’s time to build a new one. This is because they need one with a better condition so that they can continue to perform religious ceremonies.

The abbot said they planned to rebuild it in the same old style and to enlarge it so they had more space (it is really a tiny vihara). What they fear is that if and when the vihara in under the protection of Department of Fine Arts, the construction might get halted from budget cut or other unexpected reasons and the villagers will end up having no hall for their ritual performances. If the vihara is being put under the protection of Department of Fine Arts, it will no longer belong to them; it will become a showcase for tourists, no longer a living vihara the way it is. We sensed and sympathized with the frustration the abbot and local people feel about this sensitive issue.

I for one can’t decide what is best for Thongsiri vihara. Yes, it is worth being preserved. But if this means the villagers will have to find a new temple, who will help them find one? Is an old building, regardless of its architectural and cultural values, as important or more important than preserving a living cultural heritage? Do we want a museum or a living temple? This is a hard question and I think both sides have to consider factors that affect the demolishing of Thongsiri vihara. Often times going by the book and overlooking people’s feelings results in sad circumstances. We promise the abbot that we will publicize his and the villagers’ view on the subject so that the public is aware of the other side of the story. The villagers working in the hall thanked us for our promise and gave us blessing. I hope that whatever the result of the meeting on Feb. 3, 2011 maybe, it is one which yields benefits for those who deserve them the most, one that both sides can “win.”

2011 New Year Reflection

It’s the end of a year, again. It’s really only another day but we can always look at it as a benchmark of a life another year lived, our own or others’. Most people like to reflect on what has come to pass and what lie ahead for them. For this reason, I find the end of a year and the beginning of another somewhat useful.

The end of this year revealed a few deaths for me. An ancient college teacher passed away, she was old and frail so that was not much of a surprise. A husband of another older college teacher also died, of old age and illness. A friend posted about a tragic accident that took away 8 lives of people whom we think had so much to contribute to the world, an uncalled-for loss to society.

We did not get a chance to attend the funeral of the teacher who died as her relatives arranged the ceremony in Bangkok, so her friends and colleagues here in Chiang Mai arranged some kind a wake for her at Wat Suandok(mai) one morning. Professor Sang Changnam gave a soulful talk about her and I got to meet my old teachers and many of the deceased’s friends and colleagues whom I don’t get to see on a regular basis, those whom I have lost touch with. It was nice to see them looking exactly the same and vibrant as ever.

An occasion like this—mourning the dead—is a very constructive occasion. It reminds us that we go on, that we have to be strong because there will be more goodbyes to say. Seeing someone dying should not make us sad or hopeless, it should create an opposite response as it brings people who are left behind a little more closer and it makes us appreciate life a little better. It also makes us more cautious of what we do and tells us to start doing things that are worthwhile. Someone has said “Live life to the fullest, laugh and the world laughs with you, love like there’s no tomorrow.” And these are my new year mottos. For those who know me well, this is hardly new; I’m simply revising and continuing with the same old concepts. I think they are fulfilling sentiments, and they could be yours. Enjoy!

9 Lives ?

Recently my ex-boyfriend and I found each other on Facebook. We were together during college and after that, our lives never crossed paths; it has been roughly 28 years. We were classmates before and now we resume that relationship. So far so good, another lost friend found; a common story on Facebook.

Then something happened that made me ponder about a totally different thing. The way he addresses me, talks to me, makes comments about me, makes me gradually realize that, for him I am still that girl 28 years ago. In the beginning I really didn’t recognize that girl. I felt strange for no reason until it dawned on me that he has not really been addressing me; he has been “talking” to the “old me” and suddenly I realized that I have changed so much.

How many personalities could a person have in a lifetime? We are certainly not the kind of person we were when we were 20 years old. When we reached our 30s, we had evolved into yet another “person.” I read from somewhere someone says a person takes time to become one. This might be at least partly true. Otherwise the movies like “Young Victoria” which is a story of the young Queen Victoria of England who had done so much for the prosperity of Britain that her name graces an English historical period, wouldn’t make any sense. Likewise that movie about the young Coco Chanel, one of the great designers of our time. These examples just confirm that their young lives are as important and interesting as the lives that make them world famous.

Are we the most complete and perfect at our current personality? Are we always happy with this person we have become? Is it possible to get stuck emotionally with our “old personality”? It is not uncommon to see people using their old photos as their Facebook profile picture, or old friends sharing old, sepia photos of their youth. Why do we dwell in or like to visit our past? Maybe that’s what psychology is for. I may have enjoyed the few personalities of my past, but I think I’m most content with the current one and I certainly look forward to meeting the "future me."

Another complication about the evolution of our person is that we might perceive ourselves to be of one personality but people around us might take us to be a different kind of person. This of course makes everything all the more confusing. In the middle of all this, I guess the best way to survive is to know thyself the way you really are. You might have very nasty habits, you might treat people who love you badly, you may take for granted those who have labored for your well being, etc. But if that’s who you are, denying it won’t get you anywhere. An ancient and wise Chinese philosopher says “Know your enemy and know yourself,” but I’d say know yourself, period. Knowing how terrible you are often times makes you more considerate to other people. An ability to accept yourself the way you really are is an acquired skill, it could be hard, but it might be worth trying.

Privacy? What privacy?

Facebook recently launched a new configuration to adjust the degree of privacy or what I want to call degree of personal exposure for its users. What you post on Facebook could be monitored in such a way that you can limit the number of people you want your posts to be seen or accessed. Couldn't help but laughed in my head when I saw this. You decide to do Facebook and now you worry about your exposure? What an oxymoron!!

We have to admit that on this day and age, people are more of an exhibitionist; we want ourselves to be out there for the world to see. We want to be seen, to be heard, and gradually, hopefully to be approved or even admired for one reason or another. This is an era of self-marketing; everybody can appear on screen (doesn't matter it's only a computer screen), anybody's soul could be displayed; you can share the most intimate information about yourselves on the web, and we do that on the daily basis. We share our artistic expressions, our lifestyle, our innermost feelings, right down to how we train our dog, with complete strangers sometimes.

I remember many years ago, my father mentioned to me that he wanted to live a long life, just so that he could witness new technology and what it could do for us. He was saying before PC that computer would be a BIG thing. But I'm sure he would have freaked out if he was alive and see what people are doing on social websites. Our older generations guarded their privacy. It was even bad form to talk about yourself. You were supposed to listen to other people's stories but if you have a story, people will eventually find out if it's good enough.

But now we even have our own blog to "sell" what we assume other people are interested in. Nowadays we don't even blink when we see people posted half naked or babble on about what's deep in their mind. We read and watch very personal massages, incidents, stories, clips, etc. everyday when we log on.

Another example of how hypocritical we are about our privacy concerns the way we use mobile phone. Don't you get it that having a mobile phone means people can get to you at any time--didn't that sound scary for you the first time you considered buying a cell phone? Now people who carry cell phone say they like e-mail because unlike a call on your cell phone, you don't have to interact with the person who wants to connect to you when they want to. With e-mail you can choose the time you want to interact--thus more privacy. Dude, this is not the time or the place to worry about privacy! If you want privacy, you wouldn't buy a cell phone in the first place.

This is why it strikes me as very ironic when people who live among all these technologies start whining about keeping their privacy. Come on, surely you are not too naive to know that to use the Internet or other type of communication technology means you have "sold" your privacy; you are like Christine in "The Phantom of the Opera;" in order to sing, you have to sacrifice your soul to the devil.