INTENTION, ACTION AND IMPACT

People ask between intention action and impact which is most crucial?   The simple and straight answer would be impact, since impact is the deciding factor.  But when we delve a little deeper we realize that the above answer  of "impact " is superficial and isolated.

The integral answer would be to harmonize the three. Good intention without right actions leads to perpetual confusion. Right action without right intentions are  mechanistic and there is no human sensitivity. Great impact without intent and right actions leads to short lived celebrations.It is like watching a movie that gives a great impact, but what intent is there and what actions were involved in impact is the real question.

When Bhisma decided to fight on behalf of the  kurus he had the great intention of being true to his vows, but his actions were anti-dharma and anti God. There was a conflict between intent and action.
When Karna decided to perform charity relentlessly, his action of charity was laudable, but what was his intention?
To eliminate Arjuna by the blessing received by such charity.
Duryodhana's victory during gambling match was impacting the kuru Kula.  There was  prosperity for the Kauravas, but their action and intentions were shady and brutal.  Another example is of Yudhsthira's lamentation after the war .The war was fought with good intentions and most of the time with right actions and  the impact was a Dharmik kingdom, but the colossal human loss  due to war caused perpetual pain to Yudhsthira maharaja.

Therefore dharma says try to  harmonise the three -intentions, actions and impact to the maximum degree possible .That is sanatana dharma. It may be difficult at times to be harmonious then certain rare compromises are suggested.  Those comprmises are apadha dharma, meaning emergency decisions.But apada dharma is not sanatana dharma.   when emergency become everyday dharma, then it is adharma.  Hence Balance and harmony becomes our responsibility.

MOVING AWAY

A civilization flourishes and suddenly it becomes uninhabited. Why does this happen and who causes it?

While Sri Rama and Laxmana were accompanying the great sage Vishwamitra muni to chastise the intruding  demons in the Yagna of the sages they crossed many places.  Vishwamitra muni told them about the history of the places that they crossed .He talked of Angamalaja a place where  Indra was purified by  the devatas and where Tataka was living. Such a famous place had now become uninhabited. 
The flourishing city of Mathura after Jarasandh's attack was deserted by the Yadavas.
Ayodhya was given up by Lava and Kusha and Kushasthali was made into a flourishing metropolis.
In due course Kushasthali was forgotten until Sri Krishna refurbished the city and named it Dwaraka. As time passed Dwaraka was inundated to the extent that people question it's existence today.
Even in medival history we hear about the great town of Hampi the capital of Vijayanagar which today has become a  historic place of ruins.
Shivaji's Raigad is reduced to a tourist spot.
Britain, who conquered almost the entire world has shrinking number of original Brits staying in London what an irony? 

This is a pattern of life creating something substantial so that eventually it remains in some obscure pages of history. The beauty and reality is that for the legacy to continue one has to keep doing what our ancestors have done knowing well enough that all creation has a limited life span but has a continuum of legacy. So the great Dharmik people create in a way as if what they create is going to exist eternally and simultaneously have the mental detachment after creation.
In living and leaving is an amazing harmony of life.
One gives meaning and the other gives feeling of non attachment.  Living gives legacy and leaving gives non attachment.

REASONS AND DECISION

When we decide to do something with certain reasons we  feel "we have taken the right decision for the right reasons." However at a later date we realise that there is a big gap between the right reason and the right decision.

To illustrate this we can study the examples of Arjuna and Hanumana.   Arjuna had great reasons for not fighting the battle, but not fighting was not a choice during the Kurukshetra conflict. Arjuna reasoned with Sri Krishna that fighting will create lossof life and how could he fight against those who were worship-able like Bhisma and Drona.
He reasoned that the ancestors would not beoffered due final rites which they deserved, womenfolk would be neglected and would be prone to exploitation and family traditions would be destroyed.
Sri Krishna did not object to his reasoning but questioned the decision of not fighting. 

Sri Hanumana on other hand made the amazing decision of accepting Vibhishana under Sri Rama's shelter.   But Hanumana's reasons for accepting Vibhishana were unacceptable to Sri Rama.  Hanumana reasoned that Vibhishana had no fault and he suggested that Vibhishan had come to take shelter of Sri Rama on hearing that Sri Rama was giving the kingdom to Sugriva by eliminating Vali. Sri Rama objected to Hanumana's reasons but was glad that Hanumana was wanting that Sri Rama accept Vibhishana.   Vibhishana s shortcoming was that he  had served Ravana for long and that he was Ravana 's brother.

Arjuna's reasons were worthy but his decision?
Hanumana's decision was wonderful but his reasons?
It is important to minimise the gap between the right reasons and the right decision so that there is a long lasting effect.
Right reason and a good decision is a great legacy maker.

COW AND WAR

It is strange that we seldom learn from history and hence history  repeats its  patterns. Only the names of the characters and place of action changes.  It is true that one can never create a pure world and  such a world does not exist. The world  infact is full of duality.  Good will certainly bring the bad, if not today then tomorrow it will certainly come.

Once the great king,  Kartiviryarjuna  become arrogant, and puffed up, by the daily activities of ruling the kingdom and every body obeying him. One day he went to hunt in the forest. Being very thirsty, he visited the Ashrama ofJamdagneya Rishi. The king was expecting some comfort for his exhaustion but not great  luxury. 
The king was intrigued when he  was welcomed  with great opulence. 
He wondered how such an ordinary bramin could provide such an opulent treat?  What was the mystery?  Instead of simply appreciating, he wanted  to know the source of the host’s ability to entertain.

He heard from the inmates of the Ashrama that the  source of opulence  was the great Kamadhenu cow(wish fulfilling cow). The  king was determined  to have this cow for himself.    Jamdagney refused  to part with the cow saying, that “it is like asking me to give my pious credits to you , it needs to be earned by personal endevour. "

The king was in  no mood to listen, he became  violent and  dragged the cow by his military power .The cow did not budge, the King beheaded the sage, and carried his blood dripping head in front of the cow.  The cow started walking towards the sage as if following her loving guardian.

This  henious act of King Kartiviryarjuna was the turning point of his life .
Jamdagneya's son, Parashurama, the warrior brahamana, dismantled and destroyed the king by wiping out his kingdom .He fought till Aryavrata was freed from such demoniac kings.

There are many such episodes narrated in our dharmik traditions. These incidents indicate that a cow based prosperity has to be earned with grace and affection towards them. When force and brutality  is used there is bound to be violence and bloodshed .

VOICE OF THE DEAD

Voice of the dead creates fear in our minds as we assume that the voice belongs to a ghost. This voice of the dead is a symbolic connotation.
It refers to studying  the history of the dead to learn something substantial.  Vidura spoke to Dhritharasthra when Duryodhana was born. He was wise enough to see death in future if this new born baby was allowed to live by the blind King in the future.The history of the dead kuru kula was probably reminding him of taking the right decision at the right moment.
King Bharata who was the ancestor of king Dhritharasthra was a dharmik ruler and hence for the sake of his citizens had renounced his useless and wasteful children, and  instead chose an outsider for the post of King.
“The dead spoke without speaking.”

When Gandhari saw her dead children  on the battlefield of Kurukshetra,  she did not learn her lesson. Her anger and pain made her curse rather than warn the other living members of the royal order.  She cursed Sri Krishna, that His family would die in a fratricidal war. She believed that her peace was in making pieces of  the royal family by their war.  The dead caused her to create more death in the future.

Yudhisthira on hearing from Arjuna the departure of the Yadavas from this world, including Sri Krishna and Balarama, was mortified. He was ready to move out of this world.  Disappearance of the lord made him lose all ties with this world, and made him contemplate on moving towards the ultimate destination.The departed spoke to him and he decided to move. He saw the death of all his family members as he moved, but he did not stop.
A dog was the only one who followed.

Indra came to take him to a higher realm, Yudhisthira denied and said that he would not go without the dog.
Indra was amused he asked  “ you have given up your family why not this this dog?”

Yudhisthira said, “ I gave up on my family  because they are dead and they cannot go along with me. This dog has been loyal and I shall not give up on him".  The dead Pandavas inspired Yudhishitra not to waste and to move on.

Eventually they were all united beyond birth and death in transcendence. Every one has a voice, including the dead.
Do we hear them?
Its our choice to hear the dead deaf or the dead living, does it make sense?

DIFFERENT SHASTRAS AND DIFFERENT ROLES

World, life and leaving have different perspectives  at different points in time in our  life and for aiding our vision Vyasadeva compiled a range of literatures. They are interconnected, harmonious and non- conflicting.  Conflict exists for those who see them from an exclusivist view point.

For observing the realities of the world, we have the Upnishadas, which are  secular, abstract, non descriptive and principle centric. It is important that our observations about cosmic law.
be based on them .

The Mahabharata and the Ramayana give the vision of how to live in the world.  They are not only descriptive but are depictive. Mahabharata talks of an active world and therefore it always remains contemporary. Like some one said, “immortals always are contemporary.” We can see the Duryodhanas, Dushashanas, Shakunis and the confused Karnas in our lives even today.

Ramayana teaches us about leadership and it's lone battle . It teaches us that if one is honest and hard working the fulfillment is immense. It talks of Rama  who as a leader had to forsake all relationships for his duty and the kingdom. 

Bhagavatam talks about deflecting from this world, seeing everything as futile and going towards the non-existent. The only reality being that of intense affection for the soul of our soul the supreme lord, who enchanted every one by his sweet pastimes in Vrindavana.

While living in this world most people live the life of a householder. If one is able to balance the three aspects of life namely the world , living and leaving then at the right time one becomes completely detached form this world while being fully active in one’s sva dharama.

The Pandavas are a typical example of such behavior. They had upanishadic observation, an epic like involvement in the world and puranic like detachment.  Hence when it was time for them to move away form this world, they did it in a very beautiful way