THE INTRUDER

An intruder is one who disturbs  stability and has an unsettling impact. In other words he unsettles everything. The intruder can intrude a civilisation, society, family or oneself. The intruder can be a person, race or an exclusive belief system which targets people to accept the intruder belief system and eliminates those who do not accept.

Human existence from a long time has faced this problem. Earleir there were demoniac kings who tormented their opponents by imposing their power. These kings were religious people and fortunately they never used religion for domination.The Rakshas or Asuras were clear in their logic. It was power over everything and every one.
Many were consciously atheistic but they never fought to establish their belief system on others so much.  They predominantly fought to conquer. Ravana, Kamsa, Hiranyakashipu and others are typical examples of such Asuras.

The modern world has created greater trouble than the demoniac kings with regards to conflict caused by exclusive belief systems.
Person centric faith frozen in time and unwilling to be relevant takes over the offensive mind set and uses any means to convince. Tempting, terrorising, tormenting terminating the civilisation of others , forcefully establishing their civilisation and writing a false history of their brutality.

Faith without dharma will remain a dominant problem of this modern age.Dharmik scriptures compare dharma to a man and Shraddha to a woman and their marriage gives birth to auspiciousness. Faith without dharma will always create unlimited violence. Hence dharma is the universal law beyond any particular belief system.
Dharma is like water having the power to quench our thirst.
Fire being hot.
The sun always rising from the east. Dharma is beyond any belief system and does not constrain itself to certain people, religion, caste or nations.

Watch out and act accordingly to stop the menace of religions without dharma. Reject that which causes violence and seeks support in the name of god and the godly.

Killing is killing for faith or faithlessness.
Srikrishna was willing to give space to the demoniac Duryodhana as long as he did not intrude. But the exclusivist does not want any one want to survive other than their own belief.  Does it make sense?

SECULAR VENA AND THE RISHIS

The story of King Vena is depicted in many places in our Dharmik shastras. Srimad Bhagavatam too illustrates this story and sends powerful message for all class of people.
King Anga had a son who was nastier compared to Duryodhana. His play was to brutally abuse his friends during his childhood. King tried to inform but in vain. Hence eventually gave up his efforts plus his kingdom to live a life recluse. Meanwhile the kingdom without the King became anarchical, hence the helpless minister were forced to choose Vena as the next King.  He was ruffian but he had the power to stop smaller crminals.   The kingdom was relatively peaceful.  But eventually King Vena officially started harassing with unlimited resources available to him.      The affected citizens had no clue what do with him. Seeing the situation of the kingdom the saintly Rishis,who are only interested in disseminating knowledge had to interfere in reprimanding the King. But he questioned their credibility and declared himself better than God and hence he was above the law. 
This is typical of so called atheist, secular or person centric governance.  They want to be bigger than god's law in the name of making things equal to all, they put themselves above everyone else.   The Rishis had the choice of not interfering into the affairs of state thinking it to be mundane or getting temporarily involved for  removing an brutal ruler.  They chose the later and terminated him to establish better governance in the future. Certainly they did not become politically active themselves rather they activated the system of getting better ruler.   The Rishis taught the lessons of actively taking part in changing the rotten but never actively administrating themselves.   Rishis were deep in their thoughts but wide in their reach in regards to affect the society.
Rishi, Rakshak or Yaksha. What do we want.  Rishis are deeply spiritual but consciously aware of people's suffering the spiritual and the material-- they take action when there is need, like with Vena.  Rakshakas are those who live at other's cost.  Brutal and pervert.
Yakshas live for themselves without bothering for the pain of others. They may not consciously cause pain to others but their unconscious unawareness of others pain is their sin. 
Think and choose.

LIFE FOR EXAM OR EXAM FOR LIFE

Suicide and depression are escalating along with the number of young children gearing up for competitive exams. Dying or living dead before the exam because of the fear of facing or fearing to face the outcome of the exam is becoming common.

Where is the education system leading our young minds?
Preparing them for life or preparing life for so many exams and in turn being the cause of depression and premature  death ?

Real education was planned in such a way that every person was geared to deal with life and grow by facing life as it came.
The Pandavas are the epitome of leading such a life.
The Mahabharata does not mention them sitting and studying rather  it mentions how they prepared themselves to face the challenges of life.
During their exile in the forest they handled the difficulties of physical challenge and the mental trauma of being thrown from their own kingdom by the evil kurus.They grew with conviction, cooperation, competence and the art of handling conflict with courage.The forest was an education centre for life. It was not an exam hall but there were tests all over the forest.This experience was their real wealth.

Unfortunately modern education is preparing one for exams and grades, but real education prepares one for life. Hence our reflection has to be what do we want exam or life?  The Pandavas or  the synthetic Kauravas?

SMALL BUT SIGNIFICANT

Dasaratha, the father of Sri Rama was known for his valour. He got the name Dashratha  because he travelled in ten directions fighting on behalf of the gods. 
But he lost his life in being negligent.
He was the target of a small but significant conspiracy conspired by his own wife .
Sri Rama was chosen for coronation by Dasarath and all precautions for the smooth ceremony of the  coronation were taken .
Dashratha was careful  that even Bharata was out of town.
At one point Dashratha told Sri Rama, that it was that good Bharata was not in Ayodhya. He said that even though Bharata  was good , nothing could be predicted. It was obvious that Bharata had to be present for the coronation but Dasaratha was fearful and kept him away from Ayodhya.
He  consciously kept Janaka and Kaikieyi's brothers away from this function too, even though he invited kings and dignitaries beyond the kingdom of these personalities. Dasaratha had promised Kaikeyi's father at the time of his marriage that Bharata would be coronated as king and hence he feared that Janaka  and Kaikeyi 's brothers would object and demand that Dasaratha coronate Bharata as the prince.
All was set to accomplish the coronation but Dasaratha had not expected that an ordinary maid like Manthara could turn the story around and be an instrument in changing the mind of the innocent Kaikeyi .
She forced Dasaratha to send Sri Rama to the forest and place Bharata as the future king.
This incident was sudden and completely unexpected which eventually took the life of Dasaratha.
Guarding against bigger problems is most important but what about the smaller problems that we neglect ?   They have the power to unsettle entire civilisations.
Hence Sri krsna warns in the Gita that even a small hole in the boat can ravage everything, similarly even one of our senses neglected can cause havoc.When a civilisation takes care of bigger problems but fails to recognise the Mantharas within and without they lose their land and identity.
Does it make sense?

LOSE ONE BUT ADD ONE MORE

Vishwamitra is a unique personality who by the power of his determination and by the approval of Vasishta changed his role from being a fierce Kshatriya King to fiery sage.  Interestingly to gain something he had to lose something. This is a principle of life.  He lost his kingship and became a sage.

Vishwamitra did great tapa to be promoted to being a sage, but he was tempted by Menaka. He got distracted and through her the great Shakuntla was born, whose character has been poeticised by Kalidas.  Vishwamitra muni got some unexpected things  as he was swept away by the power of passion.

When Rambha came to distract him, he was determined not be distracted. He was able to tolerate lust but in tolerating lust he lost to anger and cursed the nymph. He conquered lust, but anger the brother of lust conquered Him.

Similarly in life we see,  one may  conquer poverty but may be conquered by arrogance and sensuality. One may conquer lack of education and be a skilful professional but in doing so he or she may lose the simplicity of appreciating relationships of a family.

This is the nature of the dual world, we lose to gain. Losses and gains are a part of this dual world. Loss and gain without the foundation of dharma are unsustainable. They cannot cooperate with one other. But dharma as a sustainer has the power to harmonise.

DEATH OF LIFE?

How can life experience death when death and life are opposite of each other?
Is it not that one lives life then enters into the domain of death for a short period and again repeats the journey of life in the next birth?
So death of life is it not a misnomer?

There is a difference between living a life which is meaningful and creating a legacy for the future generation versus  existing which is nothing but burdening the surroundings where we exist.

People who exist without purpose are dead from the beginning of their life.
They have nothing to contribute but pain and misery to oneself and their surroundings. 

People who live a life of gross self destructive paths end up doing nothing constructive to any one.

In the Mahabharata we read the story of Karna, Ashwathama and a few others. They chose a path of destruction caring for none and causing colossal  confusion and conflict.  
Sri Krishna met with Karna after the  peace talk with Duryodhana failed as Sri Krishna wanted Karna to live a meaningful life by choosing  a dharmik course. He suggested to him to give up the path of adharma by giving up his friendship with Duryodhana as there would be no fight if he gave up the friendship.
Sri Krishna also offered to Karna to be the King of Hastinapura since he was the eldest of all the pandavas.
Karna did not budge and he stuck to his guns.He chose to fight for Duryodhana knowing very well that he would be finished in the war along with entire Kuru clan.  He predicted his destruction in his talk to Sri Krishna.
Karna chose willingly and consciously to die for adharma  rather than trying to fight and live for dharma.
In Ramayana Maricha also chose the same path of self destruction in the service of Ravana. He chose to die for Ravana rather than living or dying for Rama.

Choosing our path is important.
Whether we are  living or existing?  Are we dieing for legacy or living a valueless life?