jabdakhata

While poverty of material wealth is a widely acknowledged source of tribulations, another type of poverty frequently goes unnoticed, and that is the poverty of mind. Poverty of mind is manifested in various forms – like corruption and nepotism, where gathering of material wealth at any cost is considered to be the very purpose of existence and where little consideration is displayed towards others, crime, vulgar display of wealth and power, fanaticism, bigotry and intolerance, biases and prejudices, deliberate maligning of whatever or whoever one dislikes ( You may be good, but I don’t like you and therefore I’ll say only bad things about you), lack of compassion, indifference towards injustice and evil ways, and so on. The drivers are ego, lust, greed, pride, jealousy, and so on. They obfuscate truth and cover mind just like fog covers a landscape. Poverty of mind is ubiquitous. One can see a rich spending millions in his daughter’s marriage while some poor and hungry suffers not far

A democracy, one would argue, would pave the way for a more liberal and tolerant regime and people would be aware of any transgressions in an era of fast communication. Dissent can be voiced and people can throw away elected representatives if they do not function properly. Secularism and pluralism are encouraged. Just puase, look around, and think. You are living in a democracy, are these the traits around you? The media, which is supposed to be the watchdog of a democracy often connive with the ruling elite as they propagate certain ideologies and hate campaigns against others. Media exhibit certain biases against specific classes, creeds and communities as they are controlled by organizations and insititutions which have their own vested interests. Thus news and opinions promoted are often false or worse, selectively false. Ruling classes often suppress information, esp. the ones which would be detrimental and inimical to their interest. Power and money play the supreme role and pe

In West such checks and balances were not elaborate. The king in the middle ages in Europe was often in cohort with the church which interefered extensively with the state affairs,and the nobility, who had their own vested interests. Thus Rajtantra in West was often of an inferior form and therefore people suffered a lot, whereas in India we hardly find any notable instance of people suffering for long under a corrupt regime, except during the period right after Shashanka in Bengal (known as Matsyanyaya) when there was no strong king at the helm and when the lawlessness reigned supreme. That state of affairs was discontinued when a strong monarch came to power (in case of Bengal the Pals ascended to the throne of Gauda). However when we come back to the flawed democracy that we’ve inherited we find that much of Swami Vivekananda’s apprehensions have come to be true. There is a heartless bureaucracy at the centre of affairs which is also largely corrupt and which has largely retaine

Swami Vivekananda was not very comfortable with the concepts of Western democracy, although he was aware of the merits. He saw various democracies from close quarters and felt that in their present form they would not be ideal for India. Because in a democracy, people should be intelligent and educated enough to understand the nuances of various decisions. Otherwise there is an inherent risk of an unintelligent or honest majority being taken for a ride by a cunning, devious but shrewd minority. Swami Vivakananda also felt that a democracy run by bureaucrats, is unsuitable as bureaucracy is normally heartless. Bureaucrats go strictly by policies and procedures and peoples’ woes do not matter to them. In an informal discussion with his disciples he cited the examples of many innocent persons from India who lost everything, including their lives, while nurturing a vein hope of going to England to lodge their complaints with the Queen and getting their problems resolved. He said that t

In Mahabharata, Shanti Parva, there is an interesting story as part of the conversasion between Bhisma, the aged Kuru warrior who is on his deathbed, and Yudhisthira, his grandson, the Pandava king,who belongs to the opposite camp and whose army just won the war against the Kauravas or the Kuru clan. In response to the questions asked by Yudhisthira, Bhisma is explaining to him the duties of a king, of a householder, of an ascetic, the path of righteousness and virtue and the ways of dealing with people, as well as the paths of attaining the highest knowledge. In the process we come across several stories and parables – one of them illustrates how diverse interest groups instigates persons to behave in a certain way and how people should be wary of the motives behind what seems like innocent advices. A Brahmin who lost his only son went to creamte him along with his village men. Since it was already evening they decided to stay for the night and cremate the child in the morning. A