Sunday, November 29, 2009

Revolution in Hinduism

It is said that we (Indians) as a race, can never rebel. Of course, rebelling is not the first thing that comes in the common man's mind, but there has to be a revolutionary, so this statement in a way applies to all of the human race in general. There have to be some people who put forth new ideas that instill in the people, a zeal for something new and the realization that what they were doing before is wrong.

The saying I mention in the beginning of the post is more reinforced on the outsider when they look at our current state. Rabid evangelicals spouting their foul propaganda, Maoists conducting their campaign, and scheming Islamists try to convert gullible natives to their fold one way of the other and yet knowledgeable Indians just lead their normal lives.

But Hindu history suggests that we were never so placid. In fact, we are a race which even brought arrogant Gods to their knees. The story of the lifting of the Govardhan mountain reveals this.



(link)Govardhan Puja is celebrated the day after Diwali. It is the day Lord Krishna defeated Indra, the deity of thunder and rain. As per the story, Krishna saw huge preparations for the annual offering to Lord Indra and questions his father Nanda about it. He debated with the villagers about what their 'dharma' truly was. They were farmers, they should do their duty and concentrate on farming and protection of their cattle. He continued to say that all human beings should merely do their 'karma', to the best of their ability and not pray or conduct sacrifices for natural phenomenon. The villagers were convinced by Krishna, and did not proceed with the special puja (prayer). Indra was then angered, and flooded the village. Krishna then lifted Mt Govardhan and held it up as protection to his people and cattle from the rain. Indra finally accepted defeat and recognized Krishna as supreme. This aspect of Krishna's life is mostly glossed over - but it actually set up on the basis of the 'karma' philosophy later detailed in the Bhagavat Gita.


It also represents the downfall of Indra, and a new beginning in Hindu philosophy, from a more sacrificial/ appeasement oriented worship, to a more spiritual plane of thought. This evolution of thought in Hinduism was brought about by Krishna, and therefore he has been the most important Hindu deity since then - considered an 'avatar' of the supreme. The more we look at his life story - we find him to be a great reformer of his time.


Centuries of imperialism have brought Indians back to the plane of thinking the worshippers of Indra were. All our policies are rooted in sacrifice and appeasement. Take for example, the Article 370 of Kashmir. Then comes the existence of the AIMPLB. The mere mention of it should be anathema to India that there is a parallel law in the country and hence possibly a parallel power centre? Yet it thrives and we continue to tolerate it.

More such examples abound the nation. While celebrating Govardhan Pooja, not only do we sing hymns which most of us do not understand, but the whole importance of Govardhan lifting incident is lost on us. Time we remember the spirit, and act on it in our own ways.

Posted by Karmasura at 6:30 AM | 0 read my preaching.. Links to this post

A quote from S.T. Coleridge

Following is a quote from Samuel Taylor Coleridge, which intentionally/unintentionally expresses the need for Dharma in one's life.

"Either man rises up to the levels of angels, or becomes a complete demon. Man cannot stay a beast."

Posted by Karmasura at 5:35 AM | 0 read my preaching.. Links to this post

Saturday, October 17, 2009

Happy Deepavali!!

Wishing all of our readers a very Happy Deepavali and a prosperous New Year. Our sincere apologies for the more than ever sporadic posting these days but our professional life is taking a serious toll on our creative abilities. As of now, the best we can promise is merely one post per month.




But for today, an explanation from a personal blog about the story of the five days of Deepavali.
A brief excerpt is as follows:

On this Diwali day, we light lamps to commemorate the sacred memories of those great men who lived to brighten the lives of millions of their fellow beings:

● Lord Shri Krishna around whom revolved the entire story of our great epic Mahabharat and the philosopher, who preached Karmayog through his Geeta to Arjun on the battlefield of Kurukshetra, discarded his body.

● Bhagwan, Mahavir, the Jain prophet also attained nirvana on this day.

● Swami Ramtirth, the beloved "Ram Badshah" of millions of Indians was not only born on this day and took both sanyas and samadhi on this day.

● Swami Dayanand Saraswati, founder of Arya Samaj in 1875 in Mumbai, with his superb yogic powers freed his soul from his body and mingled with divinity on this auspicious day of Diwali.

Another very interesting story about this Diwali day is from the Kathopanishad. In this story, a small boy called Nachiketa believed that Yam, the god of Death was as black as the dark night of amavasya. But when he met Yam in person he was puzzled seeing Yam's calm countenance and dignified stature. Yam explained to Nachiketa on this Diwali day of amavasya that by only passing through the darkness of death, man sees the light of highest wisdom. It is only then only his soul can escape from the bondage of his mortal frame to mingle with the Supreme Power. It was then that Nachiketa realized the importance of worldly life and significance of death. All of Nachiketa's doubts were set to rest and he whole-heartedly participated in Diwali celebrations.

Posted by Karmasura at 2:32 PM | 0 read my preaching.. Links to this post

Sunday, October 4, 2009

Friendships in the Mahabharata.

When we look back at our scriptures, searching for common norms of friendship, we generally come across the friendship of Krishna and Sudama. Sudama, from a poor brahmin family and Krishna, a member of a ruling family, forge their ties in the ashrama of Rishi Sandipani. After their education is over, they depart, each on their own way.




Later, when Sudama is in trouble, he comes to Krishna for help. Although he is never asked for help, Shree Krishna, in return for the morsel of rice that he gets from Sudama, gives him everything that he needed.

Conclusion: Shree Krishna, the embodiment of God, the Supreme Power, takes care of a person at the lowest tide in his power, inspite of his dispensability.

Many Hindus are inspired by this story when they seek the friendship of the rich and the famous. It is no wonder, that the Indian state could also be following these lines in seeking ties with world superpowers. What is more troubling is that we are willing to set aside all our grievances to appease the person in power. As the Indian Ambassador to US says:
"Noting that the Indo-US civilian nuclear agreement is strong both on symbolism and on substance, Shankar said the pact not only removed a major problem that showed and constrained bilateral relations for three decades, but has created a basis for closer relations, deeper economic ties and a more productive partnership on energy security, lessening reliance on fossil fuel and combating proliferation."


However, this lesson deals with the ideal case of friendship, where differences in power and prestige are no barrier to childhood ties. Such friendship can only be sought when the past of the person in higher power shows him to be generous and content with his position in the world. But in practice, friendships with powerful people, organizations and states are a bit murky. The involvement of ego, selfish interest, the pursuit of more power and the willingness for deceit by the person in a higher position will taint this friendship and break it. The subsequent heart break could be too much to bear.

So, what is the solution? That friendship be sought only among equals. That is the message of friendship between Drupad and Dron in the Mahabharata. Drupad is the prince of the Kingdom of Paanchal, and Dron is son of sage Bharadwaj. Both of them become friends while studying in an ashrama, the same way Krishna and Sudama meet each other. While close friends in the beginning, this friendship drifts apart when they grow up. When Dron goes to Drupad to seek help that he used to promise as a child, Drupad refuses it on the grounds that Dron is not his equal.

Conclusion: For the lesser mortals, friendship should only be had among equals. It is better to be defensive in seeking personal ties than to pine hopes on some ties you cannot achieve. The desire to change yourself to develop ties with the other person must also be avoided, for that only suits the ego of the person superior to you.


Posted by Karmasura at 10:21 AM | 0 read my preaching.. Links to this post

Labels: ,

Monday, September 7, 2009

Defining power in Schindler's list: A dharmic perspective.

Schindler's list is a 1993 movie about a German businessman Oscar Schindler who goes to Krakow to take advantage of people thrust into a Jewish ghetto. He first begins to use the Jews as laborers for his factories, taking advantage of the mandated lower salaries for Jewish laborers as compared to European ones. (The laborers themselves get nothing, salary is pocketed by the SS) But when he sees what they have to undergo under his fellow Germans, he is moved and sets to right his wrongs.



There is a conversation that he holds between a German SS officer Amon Goth in the second half of the movie over a round of drinks. Goth gets drunk easily while Schindler remains sober. The following ensues:

(Goth collapses while trying to sit in a chair.. )

Schindler: Why do you drink so much? Your liver is going to explode... like a hand grenade.

Goth: You know, when I look at you.. I watch you (gasping).. you're never drunk. Oh that's .. that's real control. Control is power.. that's power.

Schindler: Is that why they fear us?

Goth: (inaudible) We kill them that is why they fear us..

Schindler: They fear us because we have the power to kill arbitrarily. When a man commits a crime, we should know that if we haven't killed anybody, we feel good. When we kill him ourselves, we feel even better. That is not power though,.. that's justice. It's different than power. Power is when we have every justification to kill, and we don't.

Goth: You think that's power?

(Schindler coming closer to Goth..)

Schindler: That's what the emperors had. When a man stole something, he's brought before the emperor. He throws himself on the ground and begs for mercy. He knows he's going to die. And the emperor pardons him. He's a worthless man, he lets him go.

Goth: I think you are drunk.

Schindler: That's power. That is power.


Dharmic Perspective: Two aspects of power are thus mentioned in the conversation. One aspect of power comes straight from the left brain (the logical brain). That is of control. Logically thinking, controlling a person's actions is power. And that control is maintained by a strict law and order, a top down enforcement of power. The pinnacle of the power pyramid controls the layer below it, that layer controls the succeeding layer and so on till at the bottom of the pyramid, the aam junta is controlled. The SS officer in the above conversation supports this view of power.

But, if we tweak the right brain a bit and be more creative with the interpretation of power, then there are other, more subtle, more humane and more effective ways of projecting power. That is shown in the example given by Oscar Schindler. An emperor of a kingdom has all the military might and executive control that he can have. He can execute a criminal if he wishes to. But, if the criminal has realized his blunder, and if the king releases him, there is hope that the criminal can improve. A life is saved thus, and life is precious. This is also a type of control, but of an indirect kind, which coerces the people to improve themselves rather than they being directed to from above.

This is a rare dharmic perspective that is hardly found in movies these days. Hats off to Steven Spielberg.

Posted by Karmasura at 11:51 PM | 1 read my preaching.. Links to this post

Saturday, August 22, 2009

Organized leadership and ministerial building after elections- The way forward for India?

This post was meant for Independence day. However, owing to some amount of thought that had to go into it to make it possible and shortage of time, it has come several days late.

Before going forward with the topic, I'd like to explain the obvious benefits of an organization to do something, rather than its rules being loose and enforced by a single authority at the top.

A single authority at the top of any institution, who might/might not have any expertise in the service is in most cases a loss to the institution. (By institution, I mean something that provides service to the public for e.g.: police, fire station, etc.) Top-down administration of any institution with full authority vested in the top, even authority to change the laws of an institution means that administration is subject to whims and fancies of the person. If the man at the helm is of high dignity and a responsible person, the system will run well. On the contrary, if he is not so, the system will languish.

An organization on the other hand, has a set of rules and regulations. People once recruited follow these rules and regulations, governed by seniors who are talented persons in that particular field, or who are products of that organization itself. In an ideal organization, with no interference of vested interests and if recruits are only possible at the lower ranks, and if people who have just the right amounts of talent and intellect are recruited, than the organization runs like a mineral refining factory. Raw ingredients in the recruits are made available at the bottom, when people are not found to have prerequisites in them, they are thrown out or stagnate at one particular level, and the people who come to the topmost level of the organization would be the best (well, best at least in that particular organization). A person who has been thus prepared is fit enough to rule the organization. He knows from the very first day of his job how the institution should be run and what it lacks. Thus, there is no on the job training, and complete order in the institution.

Taking this analogy to politics, one can argue that this is the basic difference between a monarchy and a democracy. A monarchy in most cases has been the rule of a family over a people (One exception is the first Indian state established by Raja Bharata after the dasrajana (battle of ten kings) wherein the King chose his successor depending on his fitness). An amendment of the difficulty of family rule of a person not being talented enough to rule can be done by the king having many sons and imparting them training, with the best son being chosen to rule the people. But still, training some person to do something often needs harsh lessons to be imparted. This is not often done in families, since people tend to go soft on their own when they would be harsh on the others for same mistakes committed in training programs. Thus, a system of a chosen one to lead organizations thrives only on luck, in some cases it might work, in some cases it might fail. And such failures can sometimes be catastrophic for the nation, as often seen in the past.

The training to do a task, is best imparted in organizations and not in families. A system of government that is based on an organization rather than family rule is more likely to thrive. Thus, totalitarian (party rule) and democracy usually tend to do better than monarchies which might sometimes last very long, or sometimes last very short. The drawback of an organized method of rule is that a certain dogma gets attached to the system. It gets difficult to change, since change can only happen by taking a certain majority into confidence. This difficulty is absent in a monarchy when all powers are vested in the king. However the benefit is that total buffoons are weeded out at intermediate ranks in an organization, hence chances of a complete catastrophical failure in an organization is lesser than that in monarchies. One can say, that the scales get evenly balanced.

The next step after building an organization is that it should take into account the interests of all the members of the society. A fire station cannot neglect a fire in its own street while sending vehicles to extinguish fire in a far-off place. A police station cannot neglect grievances of a particular class of people. Similarly, a government must take into account the grievances of all the people in order for it to be successful. In it, a possibility lies for the failure of totalitarian type governments when it roots for the betterment of only government apparatchiks, causes organized (i.e. ordered from the top and executed at the fundamental levels to please the apparatchiks) and not organic (make incentives for progress) progress of the people it is meant to serve.

A democracy is thus far, the most progressive form of government. The basic tenet of democracy is that the people decide the leaders. The leaders then move on to form the laws and legislature. They get to rule for a limited span of time, after which they have to go back to the people for a vote. If the people are satisfied with the government, they vote it back. If not, they will vote another political party to power.

On the face of it, it all sounds a very good proposal. However, there is one fatal flaw, the over-dependence of the system on the people. Now, the onus is on the people to be aware of happenings around them in order to operate the system efficiently. Moreover, it is also needed that they be able to see through the malicious plans of the leaders and stop them in their tracks. They need to realize that in order to have long term gains, the nation has to sacrifice some short term comforts. All of the people are needed to realize Kautilya's axiom for the training disciple from the Arthashastra.

"The training disciple is the one whose intellect has the qualities of desire to learn, listening, retention, thorough understanding, reflection, rejection of false views and intentness on truth and not on any other person." Ch. 1.5.5 [1]


In summary, they need to be equipped with cutting edge awareness, think long term and place the importance of the nation above their selfish interests.

This is no mean goal. No people can be readied for the challenges of democracy at short notice. The system gets even worse when corrupt people reach the higher rungs of power. Just one jab at power by vested interests can allow them to divide the people, favoring one section over the other. People, if not sufficiently aware of this game can fall for it and vote those that particularly favor their section of the society. This effect is called vote bank politics. A non-intellectual people will not understand learned men and get thugs voted to the higher echelons of power. The thugs will in turn start a positive feedback cycle and by vote bank politics get more thugs voted to power who will shirk their responsibilities and enter politics only to enjoy the spoils of power. This cycle would continue until: 1) People revolt en masse. 2) The country is destroyed by such shenanigans.

So, if all three forms have flaws, what is the way out?

A possible solution is that leaders, after getting elected should be made to attend an organization that hones their leadership skills. It should acquaint them with the basics of human relations, interactions with industry heads, time management, planning and other similar skills that are required for efficient rule of the nation. People who are not genuine leaders will fall short of these skills and must not proceed to becoming MPs of their elected regions.

It would then be essential that instead of the top, the top few M.P.s of a region need to attend the institution, just in case the winning M.P. fails at the organization. Now, this would undoubtedly lead to some situations wherein a member of a losing party from a region gets through the organization. This could be allowed if the member is indeed a genuine ruler. Or perhaps the party based political system can be suspended so as to avoid such chaos. As of now, it really doesn't matter which party our people vote to power since alliances between the parties are decided by the 'leaders' and not the people. The people might then have to see those people as ministers of some portfolio who belong to the parties they voted out of power!

Another possible problem may erupt as in such an organization may become biased and allow politicians of a particular school of thought up the ladder.

But note that such an organization is at least better than a completely unregulated process of allowing anybody to come to power after being voted by the people.

Lastly, we need to ensure that only the Prime Minister (P.M.) is from the people, while all the ministries should be turned into organizations run identical to PSUs with the leader of the organization heading the ministry rather than some elected person who has little knowledge of operating the field of which he might become the minister.

The ministerial organization must be made to have interactions with leaders in respective fields to allow for suitable acquisition of knowledge from the outside world in order to make decisions effectively. They should be given certain form of autonomy that the members of the parliament apart from the Prime Minister himself do not interfere in their operations. The ministerial organizations need to be subservient to the P.M. building organization so that the P.M. can affect changes in other ministries much easily and lobbyists for certain interests are avoided to come to helm in the ministries.

This way, current ministries can be kept out politics and function independently. As of now, while people can elect their P.M. to power, they do not elect the ministers. The former cherry-picks them to his liking and sometimes to the liking of coalition members of the winning coalition. Newer ministries are created to suit the interests of coalition members. Where is the will of the people in all of this anyway? Such chaos can also be avoided by having pre-established ministerial organizations. It would be less difficult to setup ministerial portfolios in such a situation.

Could a temporary implementation of such a system, a combination of people's will and organized political schools of thought be a solution to our decrepit democracy? Note I mention temporary because maintaining such organizations might be a huge strain on our economy if they acquire high complexity. And it would not be justified to have a permanent system in which the people's will is overruled by them, since the ultimate purpose of any government is to remain aligned with the people. But as long as the people are poor, not sufficiently literate and myopic, a temporary crutches of the kind mentioned above might just be what is needed.

To summarize pictorially, an ideal parliamentary kind of government with lesser number of political parties and in which there is no dabbling of parties into the administration would look something like the pyramid below.


Fig. 1 Ideal type of parliamentary government
When the number of political parties get too many, imagine spheres of varying sizes intersecting with levels 2 and 3 first. The system gets worse when there is a winning coalition instead of a winning party and the spheres start intersecting even at levels 4 and barely touching level 5 meaning that they get much more room to meddle at the lower levels and at least cause some chaos in the functioning of level 5. It gets unstable and might even collapse.

What I propose is that there be another stage between levels one and two that can serve to train the politicians before going further.. so as to refine the quality of politicians going ahead and dislodge the previous level 4 and create level A such that it has no connection to the legislature or any parties, and instead recruits people from professional organizations. This way, we can not only permanently (i.e. as long as the program is deemed necessary) cut off interference from the rising number of parties, but also fine tune the raucous lot from the parties that gets elected at the primary level.

Fig. 2: New kind of democracy


Note: A lot more of the detail may be needed to be developed in the above post. Need some help with the above thesis.

References:
[1] P. Radhakrishnan; Management fundamentals in Kautilya's Arthashastra- II; 2005; 16-22

Posted by Karmasura at 7:52 PM | 0 read my preaching.. Links to this post

Labels: , ,

Tuesday, August 11, 2009

The four debts of life

Rishi Kindamb explains the three debts of life, with the fourth debt explained by his wife at the end of episode 8. Buffer up to 35:00 to 38:50.



The session starts with Rishi Kindamb and Raja Pandu, Kunti and Madri.
Rishi: Life is both thirst and its quenching. Truth and falseness are the banks of the river of life. In its water is a mixture of both. But a knowing person is he who draws only righteous action from the water and doesn't allow falseness in his life.

Raja Pandu: So is this all life is? After filtering falseness in the filters of knowledge and experience, what does a person do about the truth? Does he return it to the same river?

Rishi: Oh king, I need not tell you anything. You know that after drawing truth from life, it doesn't need to be returned back. After truth is in ones hands, then a man should realize that he is a debtor. That he must fulfill his debts before dying. These are:

1) Dev rin (Money debt) 2) Rishi rin (Knowledge debt) 3) Pitru rin (Parental debt)

A man must fulfill these three debts before leaving his mortal self. And if somebody does so, life has been disrespected.

Raja Pandu: So what if somebody's fate does not allow him to fulfill these debts?

Rishi: Your adherence to duties should be more than your fear of fate, oh king. It is not as if man has never changed his fortune. To fulfill these debts, if you have to change your fortune, then a try must be made. This is because these debts are extraordinary.

1) Rishi rin: This belongs to Lord Shiva.

2) Dev rin: This belongs to Lord Vishnu.

3) Pitra rin: This belongs to Lord Brahma.

A man cannot escape from Shiva, Vishnu and Brahma.

Madri: So what are these debts?

Rishi: The first of these is Dev rin. This is fulfilled by donations. The second, Rishi rin is fulfilled by acquiring knowledge and spreading it. The third debt is Pitra rin. This is fulfilled by getting heirs/heiresses and continuing the family.

Kunti: What is the duty of a woman?

Rishi: Woman, or in other words, awareness, encouragement and joy is the earth. All the seeds of life are within her. She is the soul of married life. And this soul is born in the form of a child.

"यत्र नारियेस्तु पूजयन्ते, रमन्ते तत्र देवता ।"

Which means that wherever a woman is prayed to, the Gods are happy. Whoever disrespects a woman, is not a human. To protect a woman is the duty of a man.

(Session ends, all the four depart)

This part starts at 43: 33 and is said by the Rishi's wife.

"The earth is the mother of all living beings. When I think of this, I get sad that I haven't fulfilled the fourth debt, the debt of mother nature."

Epilogue: With turmoils aplenty in today's life, I found this section most appropriate to solve many problems in today's day and age. Hindu society today falls short of at least three of the above four parameters, donations of wealth, knowledge, getting children and caring for nature. With substantial amounts of all the four, we might just succeed in putting our nation on the right track.

Posted by Karmasura at 4:17 PM | 4 read my preaching.. Links to this post

Labels:

Monday, August 10, 2009

Book Excerpt: "Hindu Dharma"

Stumbled upon this while reading the comments under a post by Sandeep on his blog. It's an excerpt from the forward by P.S. Mishra, former judge of the High Court of Madras of the book "Hindu Dharma" which is the English translation of two volumes of the Tamil book "Deivatthin Kural" by Sri Sri Sri Chandrasekharendra Saraswathi Mahaswamiji. Very profound I must say, and has most of the answers to the questions I raised in this post.

"Man is no different from animals," says Sri Sankara Bhagavatpada in his Sutrabhasya. "Pasvadibhiscavisesat".

Texts tell us: "Human beings and animals have the same urges. They eat and sleep and copulate and besides, the feelings of fear are common to both. What, then, is the difference between the two? It is adherence to Dharma that distinguishes human beings from animals. Without Dharma to guide him man would be no better than an animal."

"Aharanidrabhayamaithunam ca samanyametat pasubhirnaranam

Dharmo hi tesamadhiko visesah dharmena hina pasubhissamanah"

The Lord says in Bhagavad Gita: "When a man thinks of the objects of sense, attachment to them is born; from attachment arises desire; and from desire arises anger. Anger causes delusion and from delusion springs loss of memory; loss of memory leads to the destruction of the sense of discrimination; and because of the destruction of his sense of discrimination man perishes."

Dhyayato visayan pumsah sangastesu pajayate

Sangat samjayate kamah kamat krodho bhijayate

Krodhad bhavati sammohah sammohat smrtivibhramah

Smrtibhramsad buddhinaso buddhinasat pranasyati

Commenting on these two slokas of the Gita, Swami Chinmayananda says that evil develops from our wrong thinking or false imagination like a tree developing from the seed. Thought has the power to create as well as to destroy. Rightly harnessed, it can be used for constructive purposes; if misused it will be the cause of our utter destruction. When our mind constantly dwells on a "sense-object" an attachment is created for that object. When we keep thinking of this object with increasing intensity, our attachment to it becomes crystallized as burning desire for the same. But as obstacles arise to the fulfilment of this desire, the force that at first caused the desire now turns into anger.

Swami Chinmayananda further observes that anyone whose intellect is in the grip of anger becomes deluded and loses his sense of discrimination since he is also deprived of his memory. A man who is the victim of anger is capable of doing anything, forgetful of himself and his relationship with other people. Sri Sankaracharaya observes in this connection that a deluded fool will fight even with revered persons like his own parents and preceptors, forgetting his indebtedness to them.

Says Socrates: "The noblest of all investigations... is what man should be and what he should pursue". And Samuel Taylor Coleridge observes: "If man is not rising upward to be an angel, he is sinking downward to be a devil. He cannot stop at the beast."

It is perhaps because of his understanding of the instincts of man and the need for human actions to be inspired by dharma that the famous poet Nilakantha Diksita said: "If, even after being born a man, one does not have any sense of discrimination, it would be better for such a one to be born an animal since animals are not subject to the law that controls the senses."

Our rishis knew that "all except God will perish". Man with his capacity for discrimination must be able to grasp the truth that the Atman is not different from the Bhraman. The Atman has neither a beginning nor an end. Every individual goes through a succession of births and, determined by his karma, either sinks further and further down or rises further and further up. But in life after life the Atman remains untainted.

There is a difference of opinion even among the learned as to the meaning of the word "dharma". The word is derived from "dhr" to uphold, sustain or nourish. The seers often use it in close association with "rta" and "satya". Sri Vidyaranya defines rta as the mental perception and realization of God. The Taithriya Upanishad also uses it with "satya" and "dharma". It exhorts students to speak the truth and practise dharma ("Satya vada"; "Dharmam chara"). According to Sankara Bhagavatpada, satya means speaking the truth and dharma means translating it (Satya) into action.

"Satyamiti yathasastrarthata sa eva anusthiyamanah dharmanama bhavati."

In this connection, the explanation given by Sri.K.Balasubramania Aiyar is relevant:: "An analysis of the significance of these three words (rta, satya and dharma) brings out clearly to us the fundamental basis of dharma as the ideal for an individual. While rta denotes the mental perception and realization of truth and satya denotes the exact true expression in words of the truth as perceived by the mind, dharma is the observance, in the conduct of life, of truth. In fact, dharma is the way of life which translates into action the truth perceived by the man of insight as expressed by him truly. In short, rta is truth in thought, satya is truth in words and dhrama is truth in deed."

To right-thinking people "dharma" and "satya" are interchangeable words and their goal is --- as it has always been --- to rise higher so as to realize Him who alone is the Truth. For them there is no pursuit higher than that of practising truth in thought, word and deed.

"Bhutahitam" is Sri Sankarcharya's answer to the question ( that he himself raise), "Kim Satyam ?" It means that truth (or truthfulness) is what is spoken for the well-being of all living beings. To the question,"Ko dharmah?", his answer is "Abhimato yah sistanam nija kulinam". It means that dharma is that which is determined by the elders and by learned people.

Of the four purusharthas or aims of life, dharma is always mentioned first, artha second, karma third and moksha last. The four stanzas of the Mahabharata that together go by the name of "Bharata-Savitri" contain these profound truths: Dharma is eternal but neither happiness nor sorrow is eternal; the Atman is everlasting but not that which embodies it; and from dharma arise artha and kama. They also contain Vedavyasa's lamentation: "With uplifted arms I cry but no one listens to me, 'From dharma spring artha and kama. Why is dharma then not practised?' "

Sri Sankara Bhagavatpada observes that even the wise and the learned, even men who have a vision of the exceeding subtle Atman, are overpowered by tamas and do not understand it even though clearly explained in various texts.

The Reality is perceived by one who has sraddha or faith which, according to the saints, is acceptance of the truth as proclaimed by the scriptures and as taught by the guru. By following the reasoning of the sastras and the path shown by the guru the bonds of avidya are broken and one becomes aware of the Atman. One's own experience obtained through one-pointed meditation of the Truth is another means to achieve the same goal. These moments are indeed blessed, the moments during which the Truth dawns on us as we receive instruction from our guru and as we gain wisdom that is supported by the authority of the scriptures. Yes, these indeed are moments of bliss when the senses are quietened and the mind is firmly fixed on the Atman. Thus dharma, to be precise Veda Dharma, has been and is essential for man to become a real man.

According to Sri Chandarsekharendra Saraswati, the Mahaswami, dharma is our only protection. In this book, the Great Acharya recounts all that we need to know about dharma and presents in an integrated form the various systems of thought that have flourished in this country. "The Vedas", Sri Mahaswami affirms, "represent the lofty principle that it is the one Truth that is envisaged as all that we perceive."

The discourses that make up this book are remarkable for their simple and enchanting style. The most complex of ideas are explained with such lucidity as to make them comprehensible to the ordinary reader. Sri Mahaswami deals not only with the wisdom of the Samhita part of Vedas and with other scriptural matters, he takes in his stride even modern scientific concepts like those of time and space. It is all at once so wide-ranging and so profound that we bow our heads in reverence to the Great Master of our time, the Sage of Kamakoti Pitha. His approach shows that he has no doubts in his mind, no hesitation in affirming the truths in the Vedas and sastras.


Posted by Karmasura at 12:28 PM | 0 read my preaching.. Links to this post

Labels:

Older Posts

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)