CLASH BETWEEN LOVE AND LOSS

In loving one always fears losing the beloved.  Therefore there is anxiety flavored affection in  the relationship.  In such situations one experiences pain in union which is caused by fear of losing, and when one loses, there is pain caused by losing the  object of  one’s love.

Seeing this phenomena some philosophers suggest,  giving up all relationships will lead to freedom, because there is no entanglement  of relationship. They move to the "philosophy of seclusion," having no relationship with any one.  They escape the whole affair, but that does not work, and  it is  unnatural.  One’s experience of the world does not agree with this principle of giving up to  avoid entanglement. 

Life is like a war, every one fights, there are internal struggles and external struggles, even those who are in renounced order of life, cannot avoid action, because that is not natural for the living beings. Seeing is action, and one cannot avoid seeing, and responding to seeing is reaction, that  also  cannot be  avoided.  Eating is action, and satisfaction or dissatisfaction is a  reaction.  Inhaling is action and exhaling is reaction, can anyone avoid this ?  It is unnatural to  not  be active. In this situation,  the Bhagvat Gita gives us the perfect advice.---Perform action in Karma Yoga, or Nisakama Karma or the heightened form  of Karma Yoga is Bhakti Yoga, which is done without any motivation or personal benefit. None of these processes talk about giving up things rather they talk of utilizing things,  at the cost of personal sacrifice.

In  the Mahabharata War Abhimanyu’s sacrifice was  a cause of  great pain for the pandavas . Drona had formed the Chakra vyuha, which was very difficult to break, and the only person who knew how to break the vyuha was Arjuna, who was engaged in  fighting the Shamshptakas elsewhere.

Yudhisthira had to make the tough decision of agreeing to Abhimanyu’s  bold decisioin to break  the vyuha and enter it even though he did not know how to come out.  It was break or perish, but allowing Abhimanyu meant losing him.  Yudhishira faced a conflict between love for Abhimanyu, or loss of a huge army and adharma’s progress.  He could not simply say  as the dreamer says   “ may such  a situation never arise,”  that is not a reality, the reality is, there is a clash, “love clash.”  Love of duty or Love of dutiful son Abhimanyu?

Yudhisthira’s love for dharma made him lose Abhimanyu,  it was a painful choice  but it was  also a reality of life.  Since  the loss of Abhimanyu' s life was for  a cause of dharma this loss of  life became the sign of greatest love for the pandavas.  He remained the legacy builder,  and an  immortal  soul and his presence  continued in  the Pandu kula in the form of his great son Pariksita.

Do we want the inaction dream, a  reactionary nightmare or loving, dutiful action?  Choice is ours.

IS HE YOUR PARTNER

Choosing our partner whether for life or a  professional partner,  needs some connectivity.

Arjuna chose Krishna to be his  partner his chariot driver, and Krishna was gracious enough to become a chariot driver for Arjuna.  
This picture is imprinted in the heart of millions forever.  
On the other hand when Karna  who wanted to match  Arjuna s power asked Duryodhana to find some one as good a charioteer as Krishna , Duryodhana chose Salya to drive the chariot of Karna.
Salya with  many conditions and great hesitation agreed.   
Apparently Salya was as good a chariot driver as Krishna and Karna  matched Arjuna 's valour. But  did the parternship work for Karna and Salya?
It was one of the most disastrous partnership.

Arjuna was confused in the beginning, Krishna cared for him, and eventually when Arjuna was ready to hear Krishna spoke the immortal science of the bhagvad gita.   Whenever Arjuna was in of need of any kind of help, including massaging the horses, feeding them grass, and again driving the chariot  the great lord Krishna would do it as a part of his daily routine.

On the other hand Karna was is no mood to hear anything that was spoken by Salya, and Salya in his high spirit  and at the cost  of being offensive would  continue to speak to Karna. This situation went on for days. 
Eventually Salya left Karna  as Karna would not listen.

Once the wheel of Karna 's chariot got stuck in the mud  however Salya was not there to help his partner when Karna needed him the most, to pull out the wheel of his chariot.  
This situation cost Karna his life.
Where even an ordinary charioteer could have helped Karna, his own charioteer was also not there to help him. ...
Salya was  a great partner, but the  partnership was an utter failure. It is better to choose a person who becomes part of  a good partnership even though the partner may not be  efficient.

SHORT COMINGS ARE SHORTNED

Yudhisthira was  a deep thinker  to the extent that at times Bhima would get  irritated by this quality of deep thinking.
 Bhima was action oriented  and would think from a quick  present action point of view.
 Yudhisthira would think from the point of view of  future consequences. 
Both qualities had its pluses and minuses..  
If we look only  at the future  no present how will we be survive even to see the future? 
If we look only at the present not at the future how will we enjoy  the fruits of our hard labor?
 In one sense both the pandavas  had some short coming but other party would supply the  quality which was in shortage  whenever required and  they continued to live together cooperatively.

Once Bhima was stuck in the coils of Nahusha Naga, who was a great king but had turned into a huge python by the curse of Rishi Gautam.

Nahusha would gulp every one who came in touch with him and unfortunately once mighty Bhima came in his coil.
Bhima with  all  his might  could not release himself from the jaws of the mighty python but  Yudhisthira maharaja  by his controlled emotions saved him from  near death .  Yudhisthir maharaj then inquired from Nahusha and  answered all the questions of the python  and satisfied him.

On other hand when Yudhisthira maharaja had to punish Jayadratha who  had tried to kidnap Draupadi, it was Bhima who took swift action against Jayadratha. 
This is the beauty of  the Pandava brothers, rather than exploiting each other’s weaknesses they were using each ones strength to overcome the other 's weakness. ..
They were shortening their shortcomings-----

Dharma of Yudhisthira needed the power of Bhima and Bhima s power  needed Dharma to release  power at the right place and at the right time.

Do we have Dharma in the first place and is our power is controlled by Dharma?

GOOD STRATEGY BUT PAINFUL REALITY

Satyavati’s father was able to dominate the great Devavrata who was willing to forgo all his stake for the kingdom and the pleasure of being a prince  which was due  to him by his position and birth.

Devavrata thought  only of his father Shantanu' s pleasure  ..he wanted his father  Shantanu to  be happy so that he could happily serve the citizens.  
So Devavrata agreed to Satyavati’s father's condition of forgoing the pleasure of being a king.
On this condition Satyavati and Shantanu were married.

However Satyavati  and her father ‘s pleasure was short lived. 
She had to live a life of continuous anxiety and pain.  She lost  both her  sons at an early age, and her daughter in laws became widows for most of their lives.  Her grand children were blind and diseased, and their kids had rivalry from birth, which eventually culminated into the  bloody Mahabharata war, which took the lives of millions of soldiers' .

What was the gain to Satyavati’s father, other than some pleasure in his daughter becoming a great queen?
 She was any way  meant to be the queen but the bargain that he asked for --that was a big disaster.

If he  had not bargained  for any thing for giving his daughter away to Shantanu, then there would have been a  different story, is it not?

Of course it is not about changing the story but learning from the story in our life.  How when we are assured of something, we try to get maximum out of that assurance, and it makes us fall flat on the face, to suffer for a  long time.

Bargain has to be within the limit of Dharma, so that it is profitable to a large number of people, and gives good governance.

Ultimately every value, is not a value in itself to feel good. Rather the practice of the value needs to result in  the following
1. A good structure, 
2. Creation of  good legacy of stability
3.Needs to be profitable from the material social cultural and spiritual point of view.

WORKING HARD AND CHANGING DESTINY

Dharmik scriptures are not against working and working means working hard. What the Dharmik scriptures are against is trying to manipulate our destiny with hard work.  
How do we know what is our destiny? One may raise the next question. I do not know the future hence I need to work hard to get what I think I am supposed to get.
  Working hard is our prerogative, getting some specific thing is my desire, that may sound coherent but  it is deceptive .

Dhrithrasthra was powerful but his blindness made him clearly understand that he could not be the king,  however blindness was not a disqualification to grow. 
He was not disqualified from becoming a complete human being. 
However kingship required certain specific qualifications. Which he did not have, but still he schemed to see that he and his son could be the future king of Hastinapura.  He worked hard to change his destiny but did not work hard to grow .

Unfortunately all the signals which he was receiving from all the quarters were heard but not realized, felt but not experienced.  He was instructed but he failed to put these instructions into practice.

Destiny made more twists in his life.
 It  did not give him what he duly did not deserve, plus took more things away from him in terms of peace and dharma, and because of this he lost all his children. And no one was left even to sympathize with him.  It is difficult to feel sad for such people, they loose everything, even the sympathy of good people.

Next time when we try  to equate working hard and changing destiny beware of the Dhritharasthra syndrome.
 We might be working in wrong direction and go so far way from benefitting that our hard work  instead of making us grow, it might take us in the opposite direction where we drown

DEATH DISASTER, DESTROYS NO DESTINY

Pandu was suddenly raised to be the king of Hastinapura even though he was younger than Dhritharastra. 
He was hard working but had never thought or dreamt that he would be the next king.  
He worked  hard to grow, but destiny took him to a another path.

His being king was short lived, since he was cursed by a sage who was in sensual pleasure and was mistakenly shot by Pandu. 
The sage cursed Pandu that if he ever engaged in the act of sex for pleasure or procreation, he would  be dead. 
Destiny did not take away his kingship but  took away the pleasure. Pandu on his own gave up his kingship and came to the forest to practice a life of restraint. 
After having five children through the grace of different gods, he sealed the destiny of his sons to take over the reigns of Hastinapura even though he died trying to enjoy.
 This put the pandavas into great difficulty but  their destiny of being king never changed.
Kunti along with her sons suffered a great deal , but in all the difficult conditions, they continued to remain the prospective kings of Hastinpaura. All scheming all conspiracy took them to the death gallows, but could not ultimately take away their kingship.  
Destiny  placed them as king even though they were dead, and many times they did die for the general mass of people, but not for destiny. Of course,  the pandavas did not work hard for the kingship, they worked hard to be complete human beings  that was their prerogative, and making them king was the prerogative of destiny. That means ultimately the lord  was master of everybody’s destiny.

The son of  Drona wanted to destroy the last heir of the Pandavas, so that the kuru kula would be bereft of their family, but destiny revived the dead Pariskit and placed him on the throne of Hastinapura.

The entire family of the pandavas  from Pandu to Pariksita, Kunti, to Uttara learned never to  fight the desire of the lord,
 and in all this they never stopped fighting the good war of life.

The kauravas worked hard to stop the pandavas to get what they deserved.  And pandavas worked harder to accept that also as part of their life as destiny. Not only did they become king, but they were indifferent to the change in their destiny before the stipulated time in an artificial manner, rather they used that life as the time to grow and learn, to row the their boat in the river of life.

Fighting lethargy is our response, and bowing down to our destiny is  the best response from us to the lord.

POWER IS OVER WITH PRIDE

Nahusha ascended to the throne of Indra by his supremely pious activity.  As long as he was doing pious activity he was continuing on Indra’s post. It was his good fortune to be on Indra's  post but that very fortune turned into misfortune. This was  because of  Nahusha's pride due to being in a powerful position.   
He was so intoxicated with being on Indra's  post  that he completely forgot that it  had come to him due to his good behavior. He  failed to realize that he would lose the position  if he becomes impious.  From being King of Indra, he became a  disgusting human consuming snake.

Powerful position is not a reward, 
it is a  higher responsibility for being in that position. But when responsible people consider positions as a reward, they became like the intoxicated people who lose balance in walking and fall into the ditch.

Bonus is not for squandering, bonus is an investment on the employee by the employer. No employer wants his employee to lose his efficiency by giving him a special privilege, rather he is hoping that the bonus would give greater impetus to the employee to work.
 If the employee  on receiving the bonus becomes incoherent, he not only loses what he has gained as a  privilege, but also loses the cause of his privilege- his very job.

Nahusha wanted to enjoy the queen of Indradeva, thinking  that since I am Indra,  everything that belongs to Indra is also mine. 
So to get the queen,  Nahusha made the sages carry him on a palanquin. This ruined his position further, he ordered the humble sages to go faster to her chamber,  and on losing  his patience, he kicked one of the great sages, and kicked off his piety, position and power and became  an obnoxious human eating snake.

Bonus is nothing but increased responsibility, if we want to get more bonus, we use it wisely and grow more.

AGENDA HIGH OR LOW

One is often asked the question  why even amongst the pandavas and their allies most of them died what was the cause ...?
Mahabharata gives an important insight into a person’s loyalty.  It examines not only loyalty but why a person is loyal?  If we understand the reasons of loyalty then we get a complete picture.
This clarity of vision, reduces the chances of bumping and creating conflict of opinions.
Not everyone on the Pandavas side was fighting for the cause of  Dharma. Dharma’s cause is wholesome and benefits society at large for a good amount of time. It is optimization of Dharma over maximization of Adharma.
Adharma’s core principle is narrow and selfish. It is for personal benefit. Adharmik person can practice dharma if it is personally beneficial to them.  If  it is not  beneficial then he or she shall give it up as if it is a tissue paper.
Therefore Krishna knowing these factors, and the people with these Adharmik mentalities, was expert in brining them to  the Pandava side so that they could be used against the same kind of people, the Kauravas.
Shikandi was one such person, his  aim in life was very selfish and destructive.  For three lifetimes he was waiting to kill Bhisma for Bhisma’s apparent mistake. 
Yes it was wrong on the part of Bhisma  to kidnap  (Amba) along with her sister to marry them off to Vicitravirya and Citrangadha.  Amba had already given her heart to some one else, which Bhisma did not know, and neither had Amba confided in  any one  else  including her parents about her having given her heart to some person. 
When Bhisma got to know of this after kidnapping her he graciously sent her back to her lover, but unfortunately  her lover was too small minded to accept her. 
He excused himself, citing the reason that she had been touched by another man, so  she was unacceptable. 
This was tragic,  and her desire to get Bhisma implicated  for having kidnapped her became very strong, and that is how eventually she became Shikandi to destroy Bhisma.  How sad, three lives  no other goal other than killing Bhisma.
So she was used by Krishna to make Bhisma give up his weapons and be defeated by Arjuna on the battlefield.  Very interestingly no  one cares for Shikandi for her being a great tool for the  pandava victory.  Every one glorifies Bhisma for his great character.
One may be successful in life in what one plans to do, but does it bring glory or infamy?  Because ultimately glory goes to those who know their cause and who  put all their efforts to make their cause wholesome and Dharmik .
Dharmik cause is collective  rather than individual, it is for society's benefit rather personal benefit.  It is based on compassion rather than violently passionate. 
Do we fall into the category of Shikandi for having  a very small  personal goal  or do we have a more tangible goal that's wholesome and Dharmik?

KNOWLEDGE BANK OR FREE RIVER

Knowledge is very fascinating
1  it gives meaning to life, 
2  it creates a  desire and  an ability to live.  
Without knowledge, one ceases to exist.  Therefore  the indian system of education  before the  advent of the Britishers was   a combination of disciplinary education, free education and  inbuilt education from the very family where one was born.

Certaiinly the student would go to the  teacher to learn, but his learning would not stop there, he would continue to learn beautiful lessons of life beyond the  teacher and the school and keep receiving life changing experiences throughout his life.

Kaushika Brahamana was a great student of the vedas, he learnt vedas under his teacher and he developed  a great hunger to learn more and more, he did not take to the responsibility of life after being a formal student.

His approach to life changed while facing the normal interactions of daily routine.
He met a woman who was extremely sensitive to her service to family and who had the ability to tell the Brahman how he had burned a bird with a mere glance.
She sent Kaushika Brahaman to a butcher to discover the deeper mysteries of life.  Kaushika Brahman being eager to learn did not mind going to a butcher .
A Brahman who  in  the normal course of life  would not take knowledge from  a butcher, but knowing the nature of knowledge  Kaushika Brahaman broke all conventional understanding and learned many things from a butcher and  this changed the course of his life.

Therefore indian morality says, find a good girl wherever she comes from for marriage, gold from filth and knowledge from anywhere it comes.

Therefore before the Britishers came to India there was more studying in India than the great centre of learning? Surprised?.  This is the reality of knowledge  ......
know what you had not known.

Dharmapala one of the student of Gandhi, did lot of research in indigenous education in India, he found most surprising things.  One can refer this information in his book. “The Beautiful Tree.” 

REGAINING LOST IDEINTITY

Difficulty gives rise to either one  response,
helplessness or
adventurously flavored innovative solutions.  
Many people succumb  in times of difficulty raising their hands  helplessly and do nothing about their situations.  
Unfortunately some  so called "leaders," artificially create  situations of helplessness knowing very well that some  people will succumb  so that  they can continue to exploit.

In difficulty people seek support and increase their dependency on those who help them. Support seekers start living  a life which is not  their own life -- they are molded into doing  things which they normally would not dare to do.  They live a life of slavery.  Slavery at the  physical level and then  consequently mental, cultural,  geographical and  political level. 
They cease to exist as they existed before, rather they feel ashamed to  even mention  their past.  This  phenomenon we  see all over the world, Afro Americans, Native Americans, the converted people from Hinduism
all or most of the populace who  show little or no sympathy to their former connection. 

The second kind of people, the adventurous ones, may avoid their physical connection for some time, so that they can survive, they do not act  foolishly and assert their identity and perish physically under the more superior controller. 
  They submit their body but not their mind or ego, which gives  a continuous life to their identitiy.

In the Mahabharata, Nala the great king lost everything and became a slave to his brother and worked under another king as a chariot driver,  his wife Damayanti was forsaken by her husband in the middle of the forest, she lost everything including half of the  only cloth on her body, but both Nala amd Damyanati never lost their identity.  
Eventually Damyanati figured out where her husband was, to find her husband  she declared  that she would  re marry, many suitors came hoping to marry Damayanti,  Nala also came as the chariot driver of the king,  Nala and Damyanati were re united.
So  Damayanti by her sheer zeal and desire to over come all challenges was  united as the wife of Nala . This
is a lesson that could be learned.

She broke all the so called rules of life for a normal traditional wife, thinking of remarriage, only with the desire of reuniting with her husband, so that she could continue to live with  her identity.

Look for such a leader, who has risen from dependence physically but is  independent mentally and has created a revolution in his own life and the life of others to be re united to practice his native culture.

BARGAIN --BOOMERANGS

The" Karna" of  the real  Mahabharata written by Vyaasdev is different from the stories  made up  by his followers. 
Let us look into the incident of his  giving the kavaca and kundala to Indradeva.

Karna had taken a vow to kill Arjuna by all means -- in fact he  had vowed  that  till he killed Arjuna
1. he would keep  donating  to the brahamanas, 
2.never eat anything that  was produced in  water, 
3.never allow any one to wash his feet.  
So it was a  very clear goal that he had in his mind---  killing Arjuna.

When Indra came to Karna, Karna was almost convinced that he could not  kill Arjuna and at the same time Arjuna could not pierce his armor.  
 
It would be a  tie --  a match where neither would win
but in his passion to kill Arjuna, Karna was looking for some thing which would help him kill his sworn enemy.  
Indra gave him that chance.  
He said  he would make Karna  famous in history  as the  giver of everything, including protection of his very life "the kavaca."

Karna was scheming; "give the kavaca which any way does not kill Arjuna but gives me great fame, and at the  same time ask  for something which has the power to kill Arjuna.”  

 For killing Arjuna he had to take  the risk of becoming defeatable. 
It was a gamble  but he was willing to accept the gamble, 
great fame of being charitable and at the same time a chance to kill the sworn enemy.  The proposal within his own mind was very exciting.  Of course this was not openly mentioned by Indra.

The gamble proved disastrous for Karna,  for he lost his life being brutally killed by Arjuna, though  he got some fame for being charitable amongst those who admired him .

Strategising is good, but  strategy needs to  be shrewd and not deceptive.  
Because Dharma is  a greater strategist.  Dharma will pounce over us and be victorious.  
Ultimately it was Indra who represented  God’s administrative potency, which fooled Karna, and Karna fell for it and died.

HAPPY ENDING OR RESPONSIBLE ENDING?

When we read fiction stories, many times the stories conclude with a  happy end.  
The reader breathes the fresh air and  feels relieved , their hero or heroine is  ultimately experiencing  an unending happiness.  
Even during a marriage the priest may ask the couples to take vows, "till death  do us apart"

However  observation of natural laws shows us something different from a happy ending, there is no problem with happiness, but to make  it ever lasting, sounds a  little out of space. 
There is some thing which is ever existing  or never ending  -

“the legacy of responsibility.” 

Every person has a different role to play in different stages in life  and responsibility changes according to what position  and role  the person is  in.

For a young baby  responsibilty  would be  getting into things,
For old men and women responsibility could be getting out of things ,
For adults  responsibility could be balancing  both side of things, while being engaged in  the present, and looking at the future .

A happy end shows us some kind of selfishness, either I am ending with happiness or once my happiness is over then who cares for the future?

That is the exact consciousness Duryodhana had when he was dying, He told the pandavas, "at least I enjoyed as long as I  lived, now you are living with all this blood shed."
He was so selfish and self centered, that  the future of others did not matter  to him .
On the other hand Pandavas when they were winding their life, they created  a legacy  of a  stable  future life and Pariksit took up  from where his ancestors left " The legacy of responsibility."

It is our choice if we want to be  like Duryodhana and think, “ I enjoyed life and  not care  for the future,”
But  will this attitude work?

Environment is calling and crying,  being brutally abused by our generation, as we die if we think, “wow at least I had great life.”   What a sad state of mentality that is.

Our inner misunderstanding creates a  shapeless world and our inner understanding gives shape   to shapeless  the world. 
What are we up to?

MANAGE YOUR EMOTIONS

In management there is decision making,In leadership there  is understanding why one takes such decisions.
Management is action centric, Leadership is purpose centric.  Leadership keeps community building in the center, Management keeps systems in the center. A Leader inspires people,
 A Manager uses people.
 A Leader empowers people, A Manager sees people as great resources for increased productivity.
 A Leader is human sensitive, 
 A Manager is efficiency sensitive.   
 A Leader delivers people,
 A Manager delivers results. A Leader represents Gods compassion, trust and empowerment,
 A Manager represents God’s discipline, precautions and control. In life we need  to be both a manager and a leader. When subordinates misuse the compassion aspect of God, the discipline  aspect of God rolls in.
 A challenging situation  arises when a manager  has to take a  decision with  regards to a subordinate who he trusts and has rewarded many times previously , and that subordinate is caught in  indiscipline.
 The subordinate has got the reward for good work, but  he  has misused the affection of the manager, then the manger for the upkeep of order is forced to take a  harsh decision. This is  painful but there is  no solution other than a harsh one If  he does not take  a harsh  decision, many  subordinates may follow suit. This was the very purpose why Krishna made Arjuna hear the Bhagavad gita -because as the executor of   krishna s  decision Arjuna had  to deal with his most  loved  people not dealing wth them would  only add to the  suffering of more people, and eliminating them would add to Arjuna 's suffering. By the grace of God Arjuna with great difficulty chose to punish those whose eyes he would never look into  because of respect,  because he had taken the role of manager on behalf of Krishna he had to be extremely harsh with them to the extent of awarding  them with  capital punishment. In business a businessman cannot afford compassion towards his employees when they fail to produce good results. He has to make  a choice to exist in  business or to exit  business because of sentiments towards wrong doers.   A businessman man needs to be charitable to use his resources for good reasons but  if he were to be charitable towards inefficiency that  would deprive  him of his wealth and of  his charitable disposition.
 This works In Vedanta too, God is impartial whether you are his devotee or not -in regards to judging your material side of life.  God  may award special mukti to his devotees but only after they go through whatever they deserve  to for the material mistakes they have made. Jaya Vijaya - When they offeneded the great sages, externally God  gave them punishment- to show to the world and internally God  gave them special privilege but  the privilege was not in the  business of maintenance of creation.
 The choice is ours to be manager when we are manager, and to be  a leader when we are  a leader, mixing the two  can only bring  a disastrous end, or beginning of the  end  of our role as a  manager.  Because our boss  knows the system properly and will fire us.