COMPETENT OR COMPETITIVE ???

One of the most asked questions is, ‘who is greater amongst Karna and Arjuna?’

One may answer according to one's own sentiments and feel very strongly about it.

But if we try to learn through the pages of Mahabharata, one thing becomes very clear to us that life is not about proving ourselves, but living for certain core principles. Life is not a running race competition.

The difference between Karna and Arjuna is their belief system. Karna thought that injustice was being done towards him and unfortunately he never came out of that conception. In fact, since it was his habit of blaming others for certain events in his life, eventually when his wheel got stuck and he was not able to recollect the mantra for his special weapons and was facing cruel death, he accused dharma itself to be acting against him, just like a small child may accuse the fire for his burnt finger.

Karna always wanted to prove something, like his own excellence of archery skill over others. He especially wanted to become superior to Arjuna.

On the other hand, Arjuna wanted to perform his actions in a way which was meaningful and Dharmik, instead of trying to prove something.

Therefore, it is not fair to compare Arjuna and Karna. They had a different attitude, approach and goal of life, even though their profession must have been the same.

Karna wanted to be a superior archer. Arjuna wanted to utilize his profession for the cause of dharma.
Karna wanted to be known as the greatest archer, but Dronacharya wanted Arjuna to be greatest archer.

Arjuna was willing to abide by the direction of his friend and Lord, Krishna, to facilitate the upkeep of governance. It was a big task for Arjuna to kill Karna, not because of Karna’s greatness but because he had to do it in a way that will be questioned by many of Karna's followers… by killing him unfairly. He did not want to do it.  But Krishna's logic was that Karna did not deserve a Dharmik and fair fight, he deserved the death which is given to a criminal. It was difficult for Arjuna. He might go down in history for shooting the wrong shot but he did choose to shoot the wrong shot for the right cause!
On the other hand, Karna was not even willing to abide by his friend Duryodhana for whose sake he had earlier rejected all good advice given by his father Surya himself, mother Kunti and Bhisma. He chose not to fight till Bhisma lived, because he felt Bhisma insulted him and caused great inconvenience to his friend. He independently decided not to kill the other Pandavas. He took all these decisions, even though his friend Duryodhana wanted otherwise.

To conclude, Karna was fighting for his own self, to prove he was better than everyone else, choosing to follow his own wayward mind and cloudy intelligence.

On the other hand, Arjuna was fighting for dharma and part of that was to fight his own challenging mind. When he was not able to ascertain, he was honest to approach Krishna and have a dialogue with Him and follow his good counsel.

Thus, when we compare, let us compare the right kind of people for the right reason rather than comparing the wrong kind of people for the wrong reason.

LIVING, DYING AND MAKING A LEADER

The journey of leadership, when based on responsibility, is a greater struggle because responsible people have to fight leaders who are position bound. So some fight for position and some for responsibility, and the clash always occurs between these two kinds of people. At the end of the day, when seen purely from a profit point of view, people with responsibility lose the same amount of resources as people who are fighting for power. So from a Buddhistic perspective, it is all a waste so one rather give up all attachment and focus  on Nirvana. This certainly makes sense but in the world we live in, it is irrelevant and impractical. Leadership is an unavoidable need of this world.

While winning the war of Kurukshetra, the Pandavas were losing their family members, in fact their future legacy was about to be extinguished. The Kurus killed Abhimanyu and Ashwatthama brutally killed all other sins if Draupadi. He was about to wipe out the very last heir of their family who was still in the womb. Lord Krishna protected him within the womb of Uttara, knowing that in future, the need for ideal leadership legacy would arise. He didn’t just protect the position of the Pandava family in the count of leaders, he safeguarded the legacy of continuous sacrificial spirit of the Pandavas, knowing only such dedication brings good governance.

Abhimanyu died for this spirit. Uttara chose to follow suit by living a life of sacrifice in this world. Abhimanyu’s death and Uttara’s life shared the same valour and their combined spirit brought Parikshit into this world, who had the additional quality of being protected by Krishna.

If you find a successful leader, that is one who leads and does not grab, observe his dedication and also the sacrifice his family makes. And if you find a power hungry leader, observe how he exploits. You will see the difference between the power-hungry and the sacrifice-hungry and the results their respective actions bring about.

The great war was between saving the family of Pandavas and saving the family Duryodhana. One stood for responsibility while the other wanted the power that emerges from the position. One group died brutally and so do the other,  but their purposes were different and so is the legacy, which  they’ve left us with to follow.

FORGIVENESS FORGOTTEN

Diversity in the characters of humans is caused by each individual’s background influences, which one can hardly overcome. When one acts otherwise, he or she often creates a disastrous example.

Dronacharya was a great teacher but excessive  attachment to his son made him cruelly ambitious, consciously avoid following his core nature of being a Brahmana, who is supposed to be large hearted, even though he has less resources to live with. He made a vicious circle around his own life, and got involved with adharma. And this chakra was stronger and deadlier than what he formed to destroy young Pandava Abhimanyu. Dronacharya couldn’t escape this chakra till he was released from his bondage by the sages enlightening him, Yudhishthira lying to him and Dhrishthadyumna killing him.

As a Brahmana, Drona possessed the great qualities of learning and teaching. He even taught Dhrishthadyumna, knowing well that he would be the one to kill Drona. He taught Arjuna everything without fearing that Arjuna will become better than his teacher. He was not bothered about his superior position. He was just a great teacher with no competitive spirit against his students. But then why was he killed by adharma by the very people he taught?

Dronacharya was not blind like Dhritarashtra, but he was blinded by the obsessive attachment to his son and performed many adharmik actions in the War field. He had to be terminated, but in power he was unconquerable. Someone so powerful and fighting for adharma can be really viscious and cruel. Pandavas were faced with a dilemma. Dronacharya living meant that his adharma would cause great cruelty to their army. If he lived, dharma would be stifled. Krishna asked Yudhishthira to speak the lie and eliminate Drona, who had given up his nature of ‘ksama’ or forgiveness. Yudhishthira had to use a weapon that would work. And a lie became the weapon that helped eradicated Drona; it had the power to make him throw his weapon so that Dhrishthadyumna could stop him from being adharmik.

When a forgiving Brahaman becomes viciously revengeful and obsessed with attachment, nobody can punish him by any means. But the personification of Dharma, Sri Krishna can use any weapon to put at end to their nasty deeds. Therefore, to stop adharma, it is more important to find solutions that work rather than just those that are right.

We are forced to make choices in life may be adharma of telling lie but it is meant for higher cause and personal agenda are not involved then it may be the thing to do even though apparently it is not right 

DOUBT v/s FAITH

Doubt and faith are always at loggerheads. Faith instills confidence in unseen reality and implies leading a life based on values that are not experienced in the past. Doubt, on the other hand, makes on continuously suspicious about the unseen future, urging one to move forward slowly or hampering his movement.

One may feel that the two can never reconcile. But when doubt transforms into inquiry, faith becomes reasonable, logical and scientific.

Faith, without reason and logic, is dangerously violent. It gives rise to fanaticism and bigotry. Dharmik scriptures teach us to have deep faith. It is called so because it is very logical. Apart from being logical, it gives us experiences of how it is beyond logic.

Arjuna was doubtful about his involvement in the war. He had difficulties reasoning the occurrence of the war and the bloodshed it would cause. He had many reasons against fighting. His doubts produced reservations about the outcome of the war. But instead of making his destiny bound to doubt, he chose to use them as tools of enlightenment. When presented faithfully to Lord Krishna, his doubts turned into profound inquiries, which were real, compassionate and practical. And it was these doubts of Arjuna that secured an immortal place in historical legacies because it paved the way for the Bhagavad Gita.

The Gita begins with doubt but concludes in faith. So this combination is not conflicting but cooperative, when doubters are like Arjuna and the answers are provided by Krishna.

Vedic scriptures are, therefore, full of inquires, which is why they are a dialogue and not a monologue.

When doubt haunted Yudhishthira with regards to the effects of the war, they choked his existence. Lord Krishna took him to grand old man Bhishma deva, who was lying on the bed of arrows, regretful and grateful at the same. His regret was for the mistakes he made and gratitude for the kindness of the Lord for allowing him to watch Dharma being established by letting the Pandavas win.

How Bhishma deva dispelled the doubtful Yudhishthira to take the reigns of Hastinapura is simply amazing. It forms some of the important parts of the Mahabharata. Doubts of Yudhishthira quickly took the shape of inquiries towards Bhishma and that dialogue became a great knowledge bank. It was faith giving not only to Yudhishthira but to all those who wish to do the same.

Are we ready to make turn out doubts into inquiries so that we become faithful? Or are we stuck in the darkness of doubt? The choice is ours.

THE ART OF REVOLUTION

An expert surgeon is efficient at the art of performing precise surgery and simultaneously he has a plan to create fast relief. Surgery and relief have to take place with the same expertise, so that the patient can continue with his life and even try to increase his productivity.
We may summarize in 4 steps, diagnosis, precise surgery, relief and increased productivity or at least bringing back to the healthy condition.Some leaders are good at creating a revolution against corruption or bad governance; they diagnose it and perform surgery to topple over the bad governance. But are they capable to give relief by replacing it and even further, make it better?  Governance is a great art. It is not simply about toppling over the bad leader, but also replacing him with a good one, otherwise it results in nothing but anarchy. There are so many historical incidents wherein the bad leaders were toppled over by the revolutionary people, but they failed to offer good governance, in fact what they gave was only the burden of anarchy. Krishna also stirred revolutions against many powerful kings and dictators. Not killing them could give rise to a legacy of violence. But killing them could result in either inefficient governance or no governance at all, causing anarchy. Nevertheless, Lord Krishna, expert at the art of revolution, also mastered the art of restoring and re-establishing. He appointed Yudhishthira as the next king.Being appointed as a king after the massive world war was a great responsibility, somewhat similar to being appointed as a housing cooperation's chairperson, after a massive disaster of an earthquake.   Yudhisthira, however, not only reversed the situation but also created a responsible life for all.  One who knows the art of governance should be able to take us through the complete process….
1-Diagnosis (creating revolution),
2-remove the rotten limb (toppling the bad governance),
3-give relief (start placing things in their proper place by replacing with good governance) and
4-finally make the productivity increase (prosperity starts increasing).

VIOLENTLY BEAUTIFUL

Before Hanuman decided to jump across the ocean to know mother Sita’s whereabouts, he was quiet in a reflective mood as if he was not a part of the ‘search mission’. The demeanor of Hanuman before deciding to jump was rather non-violent and modest, which normally would be appreciated. But on deciding to jump, the same Hanuman completely changed his disposition. He became boastful, even stated himself to be greater than Garuda and became violent. The weight of his body caused the mountain to vomit minerals in liquid form. The animals were disturbed. Snakes, provoked turbulently from their slumber, started throwing up poison from their mouths. When Hanuman took off, most trees were uprooted.    Plants, flowers and creepers flew in the air and were scattered hither thither.  It was as if an earthquake and hurricane had occurred together. The great Valmiki Maharshi describes these scenes very beautifully. There was so much violence but so much beauty. He says, “All the flowers were coming with Hanuman to see him off and went along with him over a long distance.  Just like relatives come to see off the departing guest. And the large trees that were uprooted were the relatives who came to see off Rama to a little distance.” Valmiki gives the flavour of opposites in one instance – cruelty in beauty and beauty in violence. He also points out the non-utility of peaceful inaction in this situation. Hanuman is beautifully tough and violently graceful. It is wonderful how Ramayana and Mahabharata are violently sweet and passionately compassionate. Can we assimilate and digest these pills, which are difficult to swallow but, at the same time, very digestible and sweet?

JUSTICE IS DIFFICULT, REVENGE IS EASY

We often see that the abused tend to follow the legacy of becoming the abuser. Students who get ragged in college go on to become the perpetrators as they become seniors. Quite often, a daughter-in-law bossed by the mother-in-law takes a similar role when she becomes one.

We may also observe that if one wants to take direct action against the party that hurts, troubles or abuses him, its easy for that person to harm or even kill them. This ruins the lives of both parties – the abused and the abuser. Revenge doesn’t build; it is destructive. In this vicious cycle of abuse and revenge, both are destroyed.

In fact, some adharmik forces use both of them for personal agenda. In Indian history, we see the great Jayachandra being revengeful of his own son-in-law Prithviraja. The latter helped the invader and both Jayachandra and Prithviraja were ruined.

Ambha wasn’t seeking justice. She was in quest of revenge, which she did get. But what was the over all gain? – Killed within 8 days. Brutally.

Seeking justice in the hand requires hard work, long waiting and being Dharmik to the core.

Pandavas were reluctant for justice. It meant overhauling the entire system. Abuse against them was an issue but they had to represent the whole of Hastinapura and beyond, who were oppressed by the misrule of Duryodhana and party. On a personal front, Bhima could’ve killed them, but that would’ve been injustice to the others who also suffered.

People fear the hard labour so they mostly prefer being abused and in turn abuse others, and feel good. They may even run away from reality by changing their attitude saying, “they’re seniors after all. They have given us so much, etc.”

Justice requires sacrifice and revenge demands hatred and anger. Justice builds, revenge breaks. Justice is conceptual while revenge is personal. In justice, we fight values; in revenge, we fight the person. In revenge, we minimize a family or a person. In justice, we reform and rebuild a society.

What are we looking for? – Easy revenge or difficult but dharmik justice?

The choice is ours and the consequences too.