jabdakhata

At the same time Mahabharata tells us one simple thing - the course of virtue is not so straight forward as some people think. There are many twists and turns. It narrates a story about a certain Brahmana called Kaushik who was extremely foolish but wanted to stay on the course of truth. While he was resting by the roadside, a few persons came running in fear for their lives and hid behind a bush. Shortly a gang of robbers came with the intention of killing those innocent victims and demanded the information from Kaushik about their whereabouts. The foolish Brahmana, knowing the great perils that these innocent guys face, gave away the information to stick to his vow of truthfulness. Now truthfulness is considered as a great virtue, but what do you think happened to those guys? They were all butchered. And what do you think happened to Kaushik? Despite being truthful he was sunk into the deepest hell. So what would the moralists say? Obviously neither the ends, nor the means we

How do we define a virtuous end? An end which is devoid of all selfishness, from which will result good for a large majority and which would not result in any harm to innocent victims, will be treated as a virtuous end. Struggle for Indian independence is a virtuous end, so is the restoration of kingdom to Pandavas. Both would serve as good for a large majority. Therefore any means can be adopted for that purpose. In the two examples cited in the first blog of this series, rescuing the damsel in distress is definitely a virtuous act even if the means employed are as cruel as causing grave injury to those bandits. Similarly helping the child to get well even by begging, borrowing or stealing from the rich is a meritorious act with a selfless end objective if done by a third person not related to the child. When we look into the examples cited in Mahabharata, killing of Abhimanyu is not a virtuous end and nor is the means employed. This is because Duryadhana’s victory would b

In Ramayana we have couple of examples like Lord Rama killing Vali while the latter was engaged in a battle with Sugriva. Laksman killed Indrajeet while the latter was busy in performing a sacrifice. How do we justify the acts of such so called cruelty and immorality perpetrated by the incarnations of God? And why would the scriptures written by great sages, whose main purpose is education of the masses for a very long period of time, probably till the end of humanity, would glorify such events? These lead us to look more closely into the end vrs. means debates and the objections raised by moralists as well as apologetics. It is not that end should always justify means or means should always justify end. However, if the end is virtuous and devoid of any selfish agenda, any means can be adopted for achieving it as long as it does not cause any harm to the innocents. Even this can be a yardstick in judging the actions of Lord Krishna and others in the above scenes in Mahabharata.

Would means justify ends or would ends justify means? There have been endless debates on this by scholars of excellent reputation. However as far as I know that this debate has produced two schools of thoughts – a) moralists, who decry every so called foul act and try to view the world through the prism of righteousness, and therefore opine on behalf of righteous means for anything and everything and b) pragmatists – who assert that righteousness is good as long as it is practical and therefore would depend on situation. Means and ends can be righteous if ordained practical, else one should be “pragmatic”. Now imagine two hypothetical situations. In the first, a child is going to die because his parents cannot afford his medical treatment. There is a rich man living nearby who has plenty of money but would not donate. There is no other source of getting help for the child. In the second, a gang of rapists is dragging a hapless victim in an uninhabited place. The only way of res

The entire Europe capitulated in Second World War, irrespective of the affiliations of individual nations. The European pride suffered a major jolt and to some extent the downward journey still continues. Notwithstanding the development in infrastructure and the social progress made by some of the erstwhile powers, there has been a general decline of the political and financial power. With the establishment of Euro zone, Europe perhaps thought that they would be able to salvage some of the earlier financial power in a global stage. But the same idea has now hit them back. In their ardent zeal to see a united, strong, Europe, they ignored the common knowledge that weak links added to a strong chain will not make the weak strong but the chain as a whole weak, so much so that it can snap. There were other problems as well. Some nations of Europe, not driven by any generosity but out of sheer compulsion (of industrial growth and labour shortage – the gap between demand and supply o

Europe had and still has many great characteristics. The European nations (or atleast the most prosperous of them) were diligent, knew how to make most of the material life and lay emphasis on a balanced life full of work and enjoyments. They had invested a lot in education, culture and scientific discoveries. Their great universities and institutions are a testimony to the progress made in different fields. A large majority of the great scientists of late nineteenth and early twentieth century were from Europe. In music, literature and art and architecture Europe continued its progress in the post Renaissance period till the early twentieth century. Europeans were fiercely nationalistic and did everything to build their country often sacrificing their personal lives for the society and the country. Most of the great schools of thoughts between fourteenth and twentieth centuries came from Europe. Proliferation of scientific thoughts made the learned and educated Europeans liberal and

The great message of deliverance that Gita puts forward for the so called sinners is actually an eye opener to its universal kindness and sympathy for all – Api chet suduracharo bhajate mam ananyabhak sadhureva sa mantavya samyag vyavasita he sa Even if the greatest of sinners worship me devoutly, with steadfast and never ending devotion, that person will soon get rid of his sins and become as pure as any holy man or saint. Because My name dispels the impurities of mind. Therefore such a so called sinner will be treated equally as any saint. He will become a holy man and will attain eternal bliss. This message of redemption for sinner turned devotees resonates throughout Gita. In the 4th Chapter we find – Api chedasi papebhyah sarvebhyah papakrittamah sarva gyanaplavenaiva brijinam santarisyasi Even if you have committed great offence, you still have hope if you gain eternal knowledge and wisdom, which will act as a raft to take you across the turbulence of life. Another gr

Gita also talks about compassion, kindness, non violence as essential traits for an individual on the path of realizing God. But it does not advocate weakness masquerading as non violence. In explaining His Vibhuti or the Supreme Powers to Arjuna,the Lord mentions – Ahimsa samata tusti tapah danam yashah ayasha bhavanti bhava bhutanam matta eve prithagvidha Non violence, equanimity, contentment, austerities, charity, prosperity, adversity, all these different aspects of human nature originate from Me only. These are not standalone traits, they are in Me, even though they appear to be different. Non violence is therefore an essential trait which the Lord advocates, but it is not a path for Arjuna, a Kshatriya who is facing a just and righteous war against a bloodthirsty brutal enemy. A true non violent person like Buddha will be able to disarm thousands of forces of violence. But until one reaches that very advanced spiritual stage, one is advised not to indiscriminately use th

If the Lord is indifferent or if He is compassionate, why would he bother about adharma or vices? Didn’t we say that He is above all pairs of opposites? So why would He be perturbed by good or bad? Reason may be many. Only God knows His designs. However He appears on stage for His devotees, who fall in dire straits when there is preponderance of evil tendencies. He also appears to make sure that His life and His followers’ lives become worth emulating for millions in the coming ages. If we take a very high view point then He is still indifferent because in terms of cosmic scale these wars and the associated destructions do not mean anything. Destruction paves the way for new creation. Nature destroys only to create afresh, just as people leave behind their worn out garments to wear a new one. Thus destruction is also a form of compassion, to give people another chance to lead a better life, probably in another age or in another world. Another explanation is that all these are part

In our last blog we asked that why would a kind and merciful God want war and destruction of mankind. The Supreme Lord’s message is not restricted to a particular age or context or person, it is universal. The purpose of a great destruction is to leave behind a message for the posterity, that do not cross your limits, or destruction is imminent. This is not a question of being kind or ruthless, this is simply a natural law. The  impersonal God is above any dualism of kindness or ruthlessness. He is detached from everything although He Is everything. We’ll see shortly in Gita that it is His will that is driving everything and everybody, though because of ignorance people talk about free will. The war is also His will, His writ upon an aggressive society which is drunk with pride, lust and avarice. He, who is the supreme creator, is also the supreme destructor. He as Atman or Brahman , the Supreme Being, is indifferent, beyond all dualistic attributes like kindness and compa

In the nineteenth century industrial revolution accelerated the growth engine. European nations were now rolling in money and surplus money meant – a) new scientific discoveries through promoting of new ideas which might be commercially viable b) wars and more wars to establish supremacy and gain a lion’s share of the plunders. Industry developed by leaps and bounds. Some new nations like Italy came up. Others like Germany emerged more powerful. France was reeling under the aftereffects of revolution and it could not withstand the shock of having a powerful neighbor. Russia under the Tsar was trying hard to keep pace. In sort, the European stage was prepared for a major confrontation and as Swami Vivekananda in his prophetic way assessed in 1897, Europe was sitting on a volcano waiting to be exploded. The race to establish control of the mineral rich areas of the world, like Africa and middle East Asia, aggravated the crisis and a “world war”, which was more of an intra European war

Lord Krishna now enters into a conventional form of argument with Arjuna, based on principles of virtue and vice. He explains that for a Kshatriya or warrior like Arjuna, there is no nobler profession than participating in a righteous war, on the side of the good. One whose dharma or duty is to fight should be delighted at the prospect of fighting for good against evil. If one does not do that, he falls from a high pedestal and people, including his enemies, look down upon him. Such a person would fall from grace and for a very long period of time people would remember him as coward, not as compassion incarnate as he is trying to portray himself. If we look into the historical context we’ll see that there are enough instances to justify what the Lord said here. If for instance Britain or United States, out of sudden compassion and spirit of non violence would have refused to fight Hitler and Nazis, many more Jews and other innocents would have been killed. To fight a scourge o

With monarchy and aristocracy getting rich, European nations had surplus wealth for patronizing art, culture, new explorations and sea voyages. This was one of the contributing factors behind the Renaissance. The great leaps made in art and literature were matched by the progress in science and philosophy. However Western philosophy and science were influenced by Helenic thoughts and Eastern ideas were not seriously considered or were not known at that time. The great strides made in Science were viewed with alarm by Church which saw its domination getting slackened with more liberal thoughts pervading the minds of educated and learned folks who were often the torch bearers of the society. At first the Church, with the help of the rulers, responded with brutal repression. Heretics and men (and women) of scientific temperaments were burnt alive, which resulted in a permanent rift between religion and science and in effect between spirituality and science. It is to be noted that in

The first three slokas in the second chapter of Gita is probably one of the greatest messages that Lord has for the mankind. This is proclaimed by none other than Swami Vivekananda in his lecture on Gita (Complete works of Swami Vivekananda). In no other scripture we find such a forceful exhortation. He says to Arjuna – Why are you dejected and despondent when there is a grave danger facing you? Where are all your bravery and noble instincts gone? Kutah tva kashmalam idam vishame samupasthitam Anaryajustam asargyam akirtikaram Arjuna Klaivam ma sma gamah Partha na etat tvam upapadyate ksudram hridayadaurvalyam tvyakta uttistha Parantapa “Do not become a eunuch, o mighty one, this does not befit you, the noble one, shun that small weakness which has gripped you, stand up and fight.” Through Arjuna this profound message is delivered to the entire mankind, to stand up and fight the terrible battle in the field of life, to be brave and bold and face all enemies. Therefore Gita is a

The first and foremost point is Gita cannot be seen in isolation from Mahabharata. The two are intrinsically related, just like Krishna's relation to Arjuna as a teacher and a student, as two friends and cousins. Although there were overt and covert attempts in the last two hundred years to prove that Gita was perhaps a later addition to Mahabharata, such intellectual assertions did not gain much ground. In Mahabharata we see that a stage is set for a great battle, there is no way this battle can be avoided because Duryadhana, the usurper, who has also played many a tricks on his cousins, the Pandavas, is adamant. All peace overtures, even one made by Krishna himself fall into pieces because Duryadhana and the Kaurava camp are not ready to compromise. Duryadhana flatly refuses donating even five villages to the five Pandava brothers. He is confident of winning because he has so many great warriors in his camp. His camp is also numerically superior, and he also draws solace from th

One of the major contentions of intellectuals against Gita is that Gita advocates war in contrast with Christian or Buddhist philosophies which value non violence above everything else. However they often tend to ignore the fact that the Vaishnava sect which is based upon the worship of Rama or Krishna as the incarnations of the supreme lord of the Universe, is fundamentally based on principles of non violence. Western academia’s love for non violence has led to the deification of Mahatma Gandhi as the incarnation of the age, just a shade below Christ and Buddha. Mahatma also defended Gita, but his interpretation was different. He was more defensive on the war advocacy part of Gita and postulated that the war described therein is symbolic, a representation of the inner conflict inherent in every human being. While this can verily be an interpretation, this is no reason for denying the war. Gita is definitely set against the background of war, the Great War between Pandavas and Kaurava

Sri Ramakrishna, like a child, was always very guileless and straight in his evaluation of others, esp. the so called scholars and intellectuals with mere book learning (who do not have spiritual traits like discrimination and renunciation to complement the learning thus acquired). He equated them with larks and vultures which soar high up in the sky (a reference to the high social status of the former) but still have an eye on the charnel-pit of greed and lust. These intellectuals clamour for name and fame. Being obsessed and driven by their ego they are highly opinionated. They are egotists and treat anybody differing from their opinions contemptuously. There are many a living sample of them whose quotes and opinions many times appear on the front pages of the newspapers. They have certainly made a name in the academic and material world without providing any practical benefit to the society and mankind. They adorn academic chairs. They are considered by the left liberal or right l

Love is a much misunderstood subject. Normally in our selfish relationship we often misconstrue love as the possessive love. But possessive love is almost certainly selfish love, it is also not unrequitted. If for some reason the other party does not pay back, often the love vanishes and is replaced by its sworn enemy – hate and repulsion. Such type of love is called "Raga" in Sanskrit and is intrinsically linked to its opposite - "Dwesha" or hatred. Love of a divine nature is on the other hand most often unselfish, unpolluted and unrequitted. It is also unconditional, not dependent on anything else. It is non possessive, since it is unselfish – the lover has no hassles in sharing her object of love with others, because she knows that by sharing her own love will not diminish, instead it will magnify by coming in contact with other love sources. Most often in a family set up love is possessive, selfish and conditional and dependent on so many preconditions to

The early adopters of Christ also included certain sects who were influenced by Buddhism, paganism and other ideals. Some of these sects, e.g. the Gnostics believed in reincarnation and many of their notions and practices were influenced by Eastern ideals of Vedanta (monism and dualism) and Buddhism. However some of these sects, being persecuted by the Church and the Holy Roman Empire, later fled to Persia and under Islamic influence many of them converted to Islam. Their original ideals helped them in forming a separate sect called Sufism with divine communion and love for God as the central theme. Others who remained in Europe, preserved the main teachings of Christianity and gave rise to what came to be known as Christian mystics who also believed in direct communion with God. Needless to say, in the middle ages, with the growing influence of Church, some of these Christian mystics were persecuted as heretics because their teachings and messages were not in sync with the preachi

Sri Ramakrishna had a simple way of teaching. Through many parables he has handed down very profound messages of Vedanta and other scriptures to his devotees and disciples. Himself uneducated in the traditional sense, he nevertheless derived this source of knowledge from direct realization. The supreme mother of the universe, according to him, passed on the required knowledge whenever a need arose for teaching others, just as a peasant woman moves forward the paddy for the removal of the husk. One of his famous parables was that of a physician to whom one day a father and a son duo appeared from a different, far away village for the treatment of the latter. The physician did a general check up but did not suggest any remedy. Instead he told them to come back next week. The next week the duo turned up and the remedy suggested was simple – “don’t eat any of those molasses”. The father was astonished – “why didn’t you tell us this last week?” he asked the physician in private. The lat