VIOLENCE AND RELIGION

Does religion cause violence?
Yes the atheists say, but the religionist object saying, “it is a wrong understanding of religion.  Religion never causes violence, the wrong practitioners cause violence.”  To this the atheist says, we have seen millions of people who got killed in crusaders attack, and  the Jehadi’s attack.  Atheists continue saying, Eslamic countries have a law against changing religion, or giving up religion. If you do change your religion then there is capital punishment. To this the religionist gives his logic to save himself from taking responsibility.  The debate goes on forever. One has the story of Stalin, Hilter,  the example of  jehadis and  the cruasaders. The violence and the debate about violence continues.

Dharmik scriptures do not  disagree about the argument of  both the parties. In fact the Bhagavatam explains  three kinds of faiths, faith in the mode of ignorance, passion and goodness.  Bhagavatam explains that faith in the mode of ignorance has a separatist mentality, people are violent, proud and envious. So the Bhagavatam says this attitude  in religion causes violence. In passion faith looks for fame, opulence and enjoyment, and hence it is competitive and lacks cooperation. In goodness one offers the results to over come the faults of the action. This has the concept of cooperation. And beyond this there is faith which is beyond these three qualities, which constitutes loving the lord only to love him. The same faith when applied in human relationship  translates into friendship and compassion. It never misses humanness.

The Bhagavatam talks about the  clash between Hiranyakashipu and Prahalda. Prahalda was the son and Hiranyakashipu the father. Father was an atheist and son was an ardent devotee of lord Vishnu. The father tortured the son to give up his faith, but Prahalda did not relent. He continued being faithful but never offensive in his behaviour.

Bhagavatam also narrates the story of Daksha  Prajapati  who was faithful but violent in nature .This story is mentioned in the 4th canto. Daksha Prajapati, offended lord Shiva and caused a lot of violence. So dharmik scripture do warn us against  being fanatical about religion, and they also talk about the consequences of not being spiritual on an individual level and collective level.

Ultimately the Bhagavatam teaches us that real non violence is one which makes us develop genuine love for Sri Krishna or the worshipable lord. The Bhagavatam also says that devotees need to be compassionate to those who are distressed, and develop friendship with those who are genuinely practicing spirituality.

LIFE-ENGINEERING

Engineering is defined as something connected to an engine, and the word enginious is the root for engineering.  Humans from the very beginning of creation have made things innovatively.  Engineering is simply taking parts from  nature and producing something that is workable as one unit. A car is a collection many parts, wheel, steering wheel, engine, gas tank and other parts, including the driver who is driving.
When we see the car passiing we say, “here goes the car,”  it is amazing, no one experiences  the car as an assembly of different  parts. Even the driver becomes a part of the car.


Similarly the body is an amazing engine, a collection of many parts. However it operates as one unit. One unique thing about this body, is that it is not only a collection  of gross parts but there are the subtle  elements like the mind, intelligence and ego, which becomes  integrated with the body. The soul is the main driver. So many different  parts become integrated and the soul which is full of knowledge, bliss and eternity resides in the body with harmony.

This engineering of harmomy between matter and spirit is the art of God, who does it by remaining in the background. Human responsibility is to maintain that harmony by observing how the world works. Disaharmony ,like a dysfunctional engine is adharma,   If such a dysfunctional engine is made to function, it can cause an accident, similarly conflicting life can cause damage to oneself and others.

If we study the Bhagavad-Gita, it is all about harmony. Sri Krishna spoke to Arjuna about balanacing life, in all aspects.
Duryodhana was adharmik not because he had another culture or faith. In fact he also knew that Sri Krishna is divine God, he was performing all kinds of sacrifices too. He also had the same teacher and belonged to the same family.
He performed the Vaishnava Yagna as compared to the Rajasuya Yagna by the Pandavas. Therefore it is not that faith that is the deciding factor of whether a person is Dharmik or Adharmik . It  is how  we implement that faith in the real world, and what  we create out of it, harmony or a hell of conflict?

Pandavas lived a powerful and harmonious lfe. They coordinated everytying so that it created community spirit. It was their best act of engineering skills. Ingenious in making the engine of life to work.

ONE PLUS ONE IS NOT ALWAYS TWO

Numerically one plus one is truly two. However  when we are referring to a person or a thing is one plus one always two?  No the equation changes completely. One gram of deadly poison mixed with one litre of milk, is more than one litre one gram. It is a deadly poison, with the power to destroy.

One spark striking one kilo of cotton is not simply two differeng things coming together. It has the power to burn the cotton and burn anything in the vicinity  of the cotton.

A young man and woman can come together for a marriage alliance, but if the combinationit's wrong, the two of them have the power to detstroy two hundred . Marriage of Prithivaraja and with the daughter of Jayacandra changed the entire history of India.

Similarly in Mahabharata, Dhritharasthra did not understand this mathematics of relationship.  For him it was hundred children whilst Vidura kept repeating that, “hundred minus one is equal to ninety nine but ninety nine plus one is equal to death of all and more.  Dhritharasthra was trying to be simplistic to the extent of being stupid, and his stupidity led to stubbornness, and then it was too late to learn the maths taught by Vidura.

Vidura kept trying to convince Dhritharasthra that if he agreed to let Duryodhana die  he would have 99 sons, but if he insisted on allowing Duryodhana to live then not only would he  lose Duryodhana but along with him all the sons would be wiped out.

Bhisma deva was too following this maths, he wanted the Pandavas and Kauravas to stay together and rule separately.  He divided the kingdom into two, but this led to the bloody war in the future. In reality it was Yudhisthira who was supposed to be the only ruler and all others were his subordinates. But when both were made different kings, one for Hastinapura and one for Indraprastha, this decision led to destruction of not only the Kuru dynasty but many more dynasties.

Therefore it is not addition or substraction that is important, but what kind of addition and what kind of substraction. Vidura’s substraction was a positive one. It would add value to the Kuru dynasty, hundred children minus one Duryodhana would allow millions of people to live without bloodshed.  But Dhritharasthra’s addition was detrimental to growth.  Ninety nine plus one Duryodhana was deadly, it created such a substraction that it wiped out many  families in tradition.

Learnig this maths is important in life, it teaches maths plus maturity, .

What kind of maths are we willing ot learn, the building one or the breaking one? Does addition add or substraction add, think over it, and use the technique of maths appropriately.

NARADA THE MANAGEMENT GURU

Unfortunately in Indian dramas the great sage Narada muni is depicted unlike his real personality in the scriptures. One needs to go a little deeper to understand such a personality.  One of the main characteristic of Narada muni is to create a rift. Ultimately the rift  creates universal good. He comes to the stage at a time, when there is a need to create superficial confusion for everlasting harmony. He is never presented as the naughty, quarrel picker who enjoys at the cost of others. When Narad muni narrates his personal story to the great Vyasadeva, one of the qualities he enumerates about himself is about his being a reflective person, and a person free from frolicking mentality .

He is a musician singing the glories of lord Hari, or Krishna and that is the essence of his characer. Simultaneously  he knows every aspect of life and is able  to uplift people upto the ultimate stage.  One who is realy elevated knows how to uplift people and bring them to the higher level and Naradamuni is one such personality.

This is the incident when Narad muni  came to Yudhisthira and gave him advise about how to rule the kingdom.

He asked Yudhisthira,
“Because of artha are you neglecting dharma, and because of dharma are you neglecting artha?
Are you able to do things at their stipulated time?
Are you providing food and salarly at the right time, if not then the workers will rebel.
Are you taking extra care of those families whose family members have laid down their life for the cause of the state?
Do you have big water bodies in your country?
Or  do you only depend on rain water?  Do you have the right kind of knowledge bank to run your country? "
Narada raised  many such questions which were pertinent to living a practical life.  They were not grossly materialistic in nature even though they related to matter . For the upkeep of the state and to facilitate the citizens to live their life in  harmony and for keeping God in the centre these questions were pertinent .  Narada muni represents the perfect balance, he is always in ecstacy singing the glories but, does not fail to ask astutue questions to kings who have taken the repsonsbility of governing people. If they fail he creates playful conflicts so that the lord can appear and punish the culprit, as was the case of Kamsa, whom Narada muni instigated to invite Krishna to Mathura and eventually punished him at the right time. Narada plays sweet Vina to invite us to divine dance but if we are like Kamsa he uses his Vina to invite wrath of God.
Its our choice which one to hear.

GARIBI HATAO..!!

"Garibi hatao, “ was a famous slogan of a political leader. It was spoken with the intention of obliterating poverty.  Of course it failed, and since then it has changed the nature of poverty.

There is the so called upgraded standard of living, where we observe that earlier the poor had no phones, now they can afford  cell phones, television in houses of the poor was unheard of now we can see television discs even in slum areas.    The poor today have at least  two-wheelers .  Children residing in slums are  commonly seen wearing western clothes. People have things but do they have wealth?

In getting things, people have lost their lands, in getting education, people have lost their connections, in getting jobs, people have lost relationships.  In getting fast  food, people have lost food cooked by their mother or wife. In getting money people have lost wealth. In being privileged people have lost their inner self, in being smart  people have lost common sense.  In trying to remove poverty, we have ended up removing a satisfied life.  We have lost wealth and gained things. We have lost culture but have got fashion We have lost aeasthetic sense and got machines. We are losing out on the beautiful nature, and getting screen savers of the alps.  We have lost cooperation but increased competition.  We have gained independence at the cost of interdependence.  We get to have girl/boy friends and express our affection openel. Free life at the cost of a loving and meaningful relationship.  We have clubs but not community, we have big bazaars but have  lost our village market, we exist but have stopped living.  Valour has gone violence has increased, heroism is exitinct but screen heroes are abundant.  Beautiful women with a depressed heart are in abundance. Beauty earlier was always unexposed from those who were exploitative however now those who want to provoke are called hot and beautiful.  Do we have solutions or only woes?

Dharmik culture talks about inspired poverty rather than imposed poverty.  Inspired poverty is the poverty of things for oneself at the cost of being available to others. The teacher was poor so that less time would be needed for oneself and more time could be given to those who were comptent to lead the society.  The Rishis or sadhus would live with  less so that they could make others live a meaningful life.  Sanyasis and Vanaprasthas, were out of competition to help people cooperate.  Saintly devoteees taught the “art of keeping God in the centre.” so that the real wealth was always experienced in good times or bad times.  Such saintly people were poor by choice so that  others could be wealthy, prosperious  and satisfied .

Unless we have such a class of people, the mission to remove poverty will continue to haunt us and trouble us.

PURUSHARTHA OR DAIVA

Yudhisthira once asked Bhismadeva what makes one successful destiny(Daiva) or action (purushartha)?

Purusha is a person who has the doer’s mentality and daiva is being dependent on something beyond oneself.  In this regard Bhisma told Yudhisthira that there is a higher power which makes everything work but we too have to endevour.  Daiva does not make it happen unless there is the flavour of endevour, and endevour does not becomes successful unless it is soaked in daiva.

Bhisma in this case said how purusharatha is responsible for success.  He said daiva follows Purusharatha. Bhisma was speaking this to the afflicted Yudhisthira who was reluctant to lead even after victory and was wanting to lead a life of a recluse, like a sannyasi.  Bhisma tried explaining to Yudhisthira about doing his duty without attachement. Yudhisthira had done his duty as a warrior and was responsible for the future course of action and lead the people as their emperor.
The mandate was clear, but Yudhisthira was unwilling.

Bhisma had to push the concept of purushartha over daiva, even though daiva is the superior force.  When someone sits and holds daiva responsible while avoiding Purushartha, then the saints and scirptures do come forward to remind the unwilling to take the reins and perform  action.  And at the same time if some one is unwilling to detach and move on with the next stage of life, the saints and the scriptures advise, “Hey you move away from the concept of I am the doer, your time is up, do not consider yourself to be the doer of activities.”   The scriptures and the saints use the right medicine and the right time.

The sleeping soul needs to be awakened to peform its duty, and the egoistic soul is to be awakened to daiva for the performance of acitivities.  There is no contradiction here rather there is a harmony in instructing people.

Eventually Yudhisthira rose and took the reins of the kingdom and became excellent at performing his duty, while keeping the partnership of daiva and purusharatha at the forefront , knowing that daiva was the major stakeholder and purushartha the minor.

FIVE VILLAGES A CHECKMATE.

When the Pandavas completed their twelve years of exile and one year of staying  incognito, they were ready to get back to their kingdom to rule as desired by the dharma principles.  But Duryodhana was stubborn and unwilling to hand over the reins to the Pandavas.  Sri Krishna decided to become a peacemaker and convince Duryodhana and the other Kurus to be logical and just.

When Sri Krishna came to Hastinapura, he tried his best to convince the Kurus, but they would not relent because of the strong influence of Duryodhana. They requested Duryodhana to part with the kingdom, but to no avail. Ultimately Krishna asked for only five villages so that the Pandavas could be happy ruling the five villages. Duryodhana roared “ I will not even give  land as much as the head of a needle.”  With this he sealed the fate of all the kings and the warriors.  They were forced to come to the battlefield to fight.

Why did Duryodhana reject the proposal of five villages instead of war and lose his own life and the life of millions of soldiers?  Was he stupid, ignorant and full of arrogance? He was certainly  arrogant, and this arrogance put him to checkmate or in a position in which he would lose either ways .
Sri Krishna was a master strategist. By asking for merely five villages he cornered all the Kurus. If they would have agreed then the Pandavas would soon expand and become the unrivalled kings, and Duryodhana would have had to stay under them. If Duryodhana gave the entire kingdom then also he would have come under subjugation.

Duryodhana had no other option other than being their subordinate. This was his destiny and only option. This was unbearable for Duryodhana. He preferred dying on the battlefield rather than dying everyday under the Pandavas. It was all about his personal agenda for which he was willing to put the entire kingdom at risk.
Such persons livng or dead are useless.   People who have a Duryodhana like mentality cause pain whilst livng and whilst dying.
Krishna tried hard to stop the war and drill some sense in the Kurus.They had the option of excuting him.
This option was offered by Krishna to the Kurus ---to bind him and hand him over to Yudhisthira, but the Kurus were unwilling or had no mettle to do this.

Krishna took the decision; he chose between the two evils. A living Duryodhana and a dying Duryodhan --- both situations would cause havoc. But a livng Duryodhana would cause perpetual havoc, so Krishna decided to remove Duryodhan once and for all, knowing very well that would cause havoc too.

Many times, life at the micro level puts us in such situations. We face a Duryodhana like situation in keeping one of our family members within the business or organisation. It is troublesome to keep them and removing  them also becomes troublesome. Therefore life is like Kurukshetra and it is better to have Sri Krishna steering our life chariot, so that even if we to take a difficult decision Krishna will be there to give us the strength to handle the situation.