Vasudhaiva Kutumbkam - What it was and what it is made out to be.

A few days ago while blog hopping, came across two great posts [(1) and (2)] by fellow blogger Bharatendu on the well known homily of Vasudhaiva Kutumbkam and how it has been misinterpreted by our socialist and secular mainstream intellectual thought which has made it out to be some kind of vision of global village by ancient India. In fact, it is nothing of the sort, and had little importance in the day to day lives of our ancients. I found these great pieces by Bharatendu spread very little, and hope to bring more attention to this topic by posting it here.

So, the shloka in which vasudhaiva kutumbkam appears is as follows: -

अयं निजः परोवेति गणना लघुचेतसां
उदार चरितानां तु वसुधैव कुटुम्बकम ॥

This is translated as :

"This is my own and that a stranger is the calculation of the narrow minded. For the magnanimous hearts however, the entire earth is but a family."

The way this shloka is quoted ( I would go so far as to say abused), it would seem that it is part of an important scripture, such as the Bhagvada Gita, the Vedas, the Manu Smriti or the Puranas and formed an important part of the life of our ancients. A few examples of it's use (from Bharatendu's blog) are as follows:

"In ancient India the liberal perspective was defined by the concept of Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam… in contradiction to the ‘Clash of Civilizations’… the theory I don’t agree with. We have to reclaim that liberal space.” : Dr. Manmohan Singh, The Prime Minister of India, Address to the Harvard Alumni Association, March 25, 2006 at New Delhi.

“…India that once, 2000 years ago, had proclaimed vasudeva(sic) kutumbakam – the world is one family…”: Ms. Sonia Gandhi in her acceptance speech on occasion of being conferred the “Grand Officer of the Order of Leopold” by Belgian government for her “constructive nationalism and efforts to foster a multicultural, tolerant society in India”, on November 11, 2006 at Brussels / Bozar.

"...Vasudhaiva Kutumbkam is our foreign policy." Pranab Mukherjee in his Rajya Sabha speech on Dec. 5 2007.

But so far, the shloka has only been found (as untill 2008 by Bharatendu) in the hitopadesha, panchatantra, certain summaries of works of Chanakya and Bharatrihari, Maha Upanishadam, certain recensions of vikrama charitra and in the works of Bhatta Udbhata and it is not at all part of a sermon directing people to believe that "the whole world is my family". I am quoting one of the stories mentioned by Bharatendu while demolishing the shloka for our purpose here to understand one instance of the use of the shloka, and the reader is requested to follow the rest of the posts linked in the references section.

subuddhi the Crow, chitrA~Nga the Deer, and ksudrabuddhi the Jackal

“Long long ago, in the champakavaTI forest of magadha, there lived two friends – a Deer called chitrA~Nga and a Crow named subuddhi. It so happened that a Jackal named kshudra-buddhi, (the proposer of vasudhaiva kuTumbakam, as we shall soon see), was passing by and his eyes caught hold of the healthy Deer as he was grazing nearby. The lust to devour him immediately arose in the Jackal’s mind, but knowing Deer to be too swift in a chase, he decided to fall back on his cunning – to win first the confidence of the Deer. The VK-preacher therefore approached the Deer, saluted him, and introduced himself as a lonely newcomer with friendly intentions, and proposed a friendship and brotherhood with the Deer. The naive Deer fell for the sweet words of kshudra-buddhi, and not knowing his true intentions, invited him to his own dwellings.

So, they started towards the Deer’s place, and on their way sitting on the branches of a champaka tree was Deer’s old and wise friend subuddhi the Crow. Seeing them passing by, the Crow asked the Deer, ‘O chitrA~Nga, who is this second fellow with you? ‘ ‘A Jackal, my new friend’, answered the Deer. To this, the Crow asked: ‘But, do you know him well enough? One should never extend friendship and shelter to anyone without knowing their real nature and intentions, learning the history of their ilk and giving them a test of time.’ The Deer lightly shrugged this aside, saying, ‘But this Jackal is very friendly’.

Seeing his friend in delusions, the Crow began relating to him a story about how jaradgava a Vulture was killed by unwisely trusting an impostor (that story reproduced later below). He warned the Deer against trusting the Jackal without learning more about him.

So far the Jackal had kept quiet, and it is at this juncture that he opened his argument with the famous shloka of vasudhaiva kuTumbakam, demanding the Deer to not be of a narrow mind by considering the Crow a friend and himself an alien. The vasudhaiva-kuTumbakam discourse successfully put to rest all doubts that had arisen in the Deer’s mind, and dismissing the Crow’s wise council he went ahead in bringing the VK-preacher into his home.”

The remainder of the story can be summed up in two sentences. The cunning VK-reciting Jackal started dwelling with the naive Deer, and as soon as the opportunity arose, pushed him into a deadly trap. However before he could kill the Deer, our wise hero subuddhi the Crow devised a clever trick by which not only the Deer was rescued but also the VK-reciting Jackal was slain.

Now, that is the context in which VK is recorded in the hitopadesha by the great paNDita of politics nArAyaNa, and he is unambiguously clear about its application when he assigns this shloka to come from a brotherhood-preaching shrewd subversionist. It gives a clear warning against blindly welcoming any idea, individual or group without due diligence of studying their history, nature and intent.

However, let us also read the other story, in response to which the VK is uttered in hitopadesha, which would leave absolutely no room for any doubts in this matter of how hitopadesha treats vasudhaiva kuTumbakam:

jaradgava the Vulture and dIrghakarNa the Cat

While warning his friend against trusting the Jackal, subuddhi the Crow thus addressed the Deer:

“There, on the banks of the mighty bhAgIrathI is a cliff called gR^idharakUTa, and upon it grew a great fig-tree. In the shelter of its hollow lived an old Vulture named jaradgava, who due to old age had neither any eyesight left in his eyes nor nails in his claws. The other birds that lived on that tree were friendly to him, and out of pity used to donate from their own food small portions to him, and this way the poor fellow was passing his days. In return, jaradgava used to guard the little offspring of the birds when the parent birds were away.

One day, when the older birds were gone, a Cat called dIrghakarNa (‘Long Eared’) came there to make a meal out of the nestlings; and those tiny birds alarmed at seeing him, created noise that roused jaradgava from his slumber. ‘Who comes there?’ demanded jaradgava. Now dIrghakarNa, on noticing the big Vulture, aborted his meal plans, but as a flight was not possible he resolved to trust his destiny and to approach tactfully. ‘Arya,’ he responded, ‘my salutes to you!’ ‘Who is that?’ asked the Vulture. ‘A Cat,’ answered dIrghakarNa. ‘Lay off, Cat, or I shall slay you,’ shouted the Vulture. ‘I am ready to die if I deserve death,’ said the Cat, ‘but first let me be heard.’ ‘OK then, tell me first your purpose of arrival.’ asked jaradgava.

‘I live,’ melodramatically began dIrghakarNa, ‘on the banks of ga~NgA, bathing daily, performing the penance of chandrAyaNa vrata, strictly being a vegetarian like a bramachArI. The birds that come there, speak very highly of you as the one firmly established in dharma and worthy of all respects. So with my curiosity greatly aroused about you, I decided to drop by Sir, to learn from you about nIti and dharma.’

‘You appear like so deep gone in learning,’ he continued, ‘and still Sir, I am surprised that your sense of dharma tells you to be ready to slay a guest! Doesn’t the nIti say unambiguously about what a man’s dharma is towards his guests?’ The Cat then went on delivering an elaborate speech, quoting eloquently from the shAstra-s about the dharma and cut quite an impressive lecture on peace and non-violence.

Shrugging that onslaught of quotations from shAstra-s aside, wise jaradgava interrupted, ‘Listen, I know only this, that you are a cat and the cats eat meat. Since here are young birds that I am given to protect, I warn you one last time – leave immediately.’

Upon this, dIrghakarNa intensified his drama, and touching the ground with his two claws and then his ears, invoking all the Gods, he said, ‘I have overcome all the passions by practicing the chandrAyaNa vrata; I have learnt the shAstra-s; and I am a follower of the religion that is called non-violence itself. And so he went on.

Such prolonged drama of the Cat finally silenced the old Vulture, who at last allowed him to live in the hollow of the tree with himself.

With the passage of days, and having gained more confidence of the Vulture, the Cat slowly began picking the nestlings for his meal. After devouring them one by one, the cunning fellow would drop their bones near the hollow of jaradgava, who being blind did not notice it.

One day, alarmed at their children going missing, the parent birds began investigating. The shrewd cat quickly made his escape, and the birds soon discovered the bones near the hollow of jaradgava. They at once inferred that their children had been eaten away by the old Vulture in whom they had placed their trust. Thus enraged the birds swiftly executed jaradgava in no time. Although being innocent and a true well-wisher of the birds, he paid for the folly of giving shelter to the wrong kind.”

Above story is which evokes the vasudhaiva kuTumbakam from the cunning subversionist in hitopadesha.

References:

[1]: The Hoax called Vasudhaiva Kutumbkam - Part 1

[2]: The Hoax called Vasudhaiva Kutumbkam - Part 2

Knowledge, from a Vedic Perspective

This is from the book: "In search of the cradle of civilization" by Georg Feuerstein, Subhash Kak and David Frawley. It is a good read, for people who are just beginning to learn about Hindu culture. I was expecting a lot more about certain details but the authors have only skimmed across several important topics. Perhaps, that was their intention. Anyway, I am paraphrasing from passages which explained what was knowledge according to my ancestors, which for people like me, who are in the field of creating knowledge might be irrelevant since we need to know things in its exactitude. The problem with knowing things from a materialist perspective is that the knowledge gets locked from the general public and they cannot grasp it without sufficient investment of time starting from the basics of that branch of knowledge. This is alleviated by the Vedic method of conveying knowledge and the subtle metaphorical ideas that are more generalized and easier to grasp for the laymen, provided he accepts a Guru and knows or is shown how to decode the metaphors. The following is how knowledge was expressed according to the Vedas: -

1) Vedic theory of knowledge is based on a belief in the interconnectedness and unity of the whole universe, primarily the three components - viz. the cosmos (adhideva), the individual living being (adhibhuta), and the Spirit (adhyatma). Thus, the Vedas are meant to be interpreted in three ways.

2) The Vedic rishis acknowledged that straight logic cannot answer all questions and that scientific knowledge included some paradoxes for e.g. Yajnavalkya when he says in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad: "The Gods are fond of the invisible and dislike the visible." In this sense, the invisible is the vast realm of existence that is not perceptible to the senses.

3) The Vedic Rishis did not go into the details of any phenomenon, but communicated the essence of what they saw. And this was in the form of metaphors, which is why it is advisable not to read the Rig Veda superficially.

4) The Vedas are to be read with a questioning attitude and not with a closed sense of dogmatism. Asking questions are the first step towards acquiring knowledge, and in this the Vedic perspective mirrors functioning of today's science.

5) The Rishis proclaimed a unity that is inexplicable and can be seen only from an elevated state of mystical awareness. This is considered a creative reservoir or potentiality, also known as the Purusha and envisioned as a giant man.

6) The world was said to be created through the Purusha's self sacrifice. His mind was said to have given rise to the Moon, his eyes to the Sun, his breath to the air element, his navel to the midspace, his head to the sky and his feet to the earth.

7) The purpose of human creation was now to preserve the unity of the Purusha and all human activity including architecture, sculpture and literature was to be modeled on it. In fact, they set the goal of life to study the mystery of the Purusha.

We shall end this topic here, for as I said, the authors have only skimmed this important topic. I will revisit it when I get my copy of this great book by one of the best authors ever possible, on the topic.

Role of religion in a society and fault tolerance.

In this day, when people have started regarding science as their, blatant outspokenness is glorified - (whether it be for a better cause or by one woman mobile republics, that remaining of no consequence) and evangelical atheism is on the rise, religion has been relegated to the poor and lower - middle middle class of the society, it might be useful to understand some role of religion in shaping the society, that too from an engineering perspective. But let me first start with Machiavelli's views on how religion is useful in shaping the society.

Reading from the points Machiavelli makes in the chapter "On the religion of Rome" from the discourses on book one of the first ten books of Titus Livy, which are as follows: (it is necessary to make an attempt to generalize the points and not quote verbatim, since Machiavelli talks from an Italian/Roman perspective which many readers might not follow or find boring.)

1. After Romulus's reign in Rome was over, the Senate elected Numa Pompilius as his successor and Numa introduces religion into Rome to discipline civil society so as to put a fear of God into the people.

2. This facilitated easing of policy execution on the part of the leaders.

3. Citizens then stood in far greater fear of breaking an oath than a law, as though they had a greater fear of God's might than for man's.

4. Religion was useful in directing the armies, in animating the people, in keeping men good and in shaming the wicked.

5. Where there is religion, it is easy to introduce military discipline, but where there is no religion, the latter can be introduced only with great difficulty.

6. Without invoking God, intelligent people have many beneficial things which might not be directly acceptable to the people.

7. Thus, religion introduced by Numa into Rome was one of the primary causes of her prosperity, for that was the source of good laws, which in turn, bring good fortune, and from good fortune results all the good from the institutions of the land.

Along with the above, there is one major sector that religion has a role in, that is, designing the society according to the rules of fault tolerance. Now, what does fault tolerance have to do with it? Well, this is what fault tolerance means. (click) The theory here, is that while you can make an excellent system when you delete any mention of God, the sole responsibility of leading such a system depends on good rule by the ruling class and which over a long period of time, decays since the ruling class will invariably get corrupt with concentration of power in the hands of a cliche. Once the ruling class starts manifesting decay, and licentiousness, the society will start crumbling, for there is nothing to fall back onto (Remember the Sanskrit saying, 'yatha raja, tatha praja' really becomes true in this case, since there is no better ideal available for the people to follow. In case of a pre-existing religion, at least some people will try to emulate the Gods of the religion, and rise above their rulers). This is where fault tolerance comes into play, that the system keeps on running at sub-optimal conditions even when the key dominoes of the system have been withdrawn. This is where Machiavelli too realizes the importance of this concept, but of course, he doesn't call it by this name. As per Machiavelli, welfare of a republic or kingdom lies not in ruling it wisely while the ruler lasts, but in organizing it in such a way that the state endures after he has passed away. And the best effect of religion is here.

The obvious corollaries (my points) that emerge from such a religion would be that -
1) The control nodes of such a religion should rest solely within the state. If the control nodes exist outside, they can lead to external manipulation of a people.

2) The structure needs to be kept decentralized with checks and balances on the powers of each control node, otherwise we have to endure with a parallel power centre apart from the Central Government in the same state.

3) Towards the above end, the religion should be divided into different philosophical schools to not only cater to people of different tastes, but also so that there is constant competition between each school, something that would help each school of thought better itself and its followers. Yet, there should be a common meeting ground of each school rooted in Dharma.

4) The end goal of such a religion should be to make people do good during the existence of a good state, even after the good state has passed, and create a legend that enables the people to resurrect the same state, or resist an imperial power.

As usual, followers are invited to add more to this post.

Differentiating the pleasant and the good.

Many people can't differentiate the pleasant and the good. This is a big problem in a democracy, where people start voting themselves lollipops and vote a bread and circus democracy in, also check what that means by an excellent post from a close ally.

I know, Diwali prayers and the feeling of union with family, laughing and joking are all good, but if you have time, try to get your countries out of such a democracy if it is in one, and if it is not in one, keep it out of it.

In this, a part of the Kathopanishad can be of use. I am quoting an excerpt from a translation of the upanishads by Swami Prabhavananda and Frederick Manchester. I assume either you have a copy of the Kathopanishad, or can read the part before the part I have taken from online sources.

Nachiketa: "Tell me, O King, the supreme secret regarding which men doubt. No other boon will I ask.

Yamaraj: "The good is one thing; the pleasant is another. These two, differing in their ends, both prompt to action. Blessed are they that choose the good; they that choose the pleasant miss the goal.

Both the good and the pleasant present themselves to men. The wise, having examined both, distinguish the one from the other. The wise prefer the good to the pleasant; the foolish, driven by fleshly desires, prefer the pleasant to the good.

Thou, O Nachiketa, having looked upon fleshly desires, delightful to the senses, hast renounced them all. Thou hast turned from the miry way, wherein many a man wallows.

Far from each other, and leading to different ends, are ignorance and knowledge. Thee, O Nachiketa, I regard as one who aspires after knowledge, for a multitude of pleasant objects were unable to tempt thee."

Please read the rest of the Upanishad from your source. Let us resolve to be like Nachiketa and be able to differentiate between the pleasant and the good this year. At some places, that has already begun to happen. May that light spread and elevate us from this darkness. A very happy deepavaly and a happy new year to all of you readers.

Sankhya vs. Yoga

In an earlier post, I had questioned why Sankhya was said to be inter-related with Karma Yoga in the Bhagwada Gita. While I haven't found anything on that, I have been able to find a discourse between Bhishma and Yudhishthira where Bhishma answers Yudhisthira on the difference between Sankhya and Yoga. This is from an unabridged version of the Shanti Parva of the Mahabharata translated by Shri Kisari Mohan Ganguli.

Yudhishthira said: It behoveth thee to explain to me, O sire, what the difference is between the Sankhya and the Yoga system of philosophy. O foremost one of Kuru's race, everything is known to thee, O thou that art conversant with all duties!

Bhishma said: The followers of Sankhya praise the Sankhya system and those regenerate persons that are Yogis praise the Yoga system. For establishing the superiority of their respective systems, each calls his own system to be the better. Men of wisdom devoted to Yoga assign proper and very good reasons, O crusher of foes, for showing that one that does not believe in the existence of God cannot attain to Emancipation. Those regenerate persons, again, that are believers in the Sankhya doctrines advance good reasons for showing that one, by acquiring true knowledge of all ends, becomes dissociated from all worldly objects, and after departing from this body, it is plain, becomes emancipated and that it cannot be otherwise. Men of great wisdom have thus expounded the Sankhya philosophy of Emancipation.

When reasons are thus balanced on both sides, those that are assigned on that side which one is otherwise inclined to adopt as one's own, should be accepted. Indeed, those words that are said on that side should be regarded as beneficial. Good men may be found on both sides. Persons like thee may adopt either opinion. The evidences of Yoga are addressed to the direct ken of the senses those of Sankhya are based on the scriptures. Both systems of philosophy are approved by me, O Yudhishthira. Both those systems of science, O king, have my concurrence and are concurred in by those that are good and wise. If practised duly according to the instructions laid down, both would, O king, cause a person to attain to the highest end. In both systems purity is equally recommended as also compassion towards all creatures, O sinless one. In both, again, the observance of vows has been equally laid down. Only the scriptures that point out their paths are different.

Yudhishthira said: If the vows, the compassion, and the fruits thereof recommended in both systems be the same, tell me, O grandsire, for what reason then are not their scriptures (in respect of the paths recommended) the same?

I have quoted only the beginning of the conversation, the rest can be followed from here.

A tribute.....

... to a person who cares a lot about our motherland.

The complete version is here: click . The whole conference was about 2 hours long.

I like the basic concept of the approach that there is someone out there, who is directly interacting with the people and coercing them to do something for the nation. However, there are a few flaws with the push of the arguments.

1) It heavily relies on information gathering.
2) It heavily relies on middle class action.
3) It ignores the masses and wants them to do nothing.
4) It ignores the spark to fire up the three Is - inspiration, information, involvement.

I doubt the existence of this middle class in the past, when we defeated the Bactrian Greeks, annihilated Scythians, Yueh-Chis, assimilated the Hephthaelites (ok this is still up in the air, one version is that we managed to destroy them as well), almost destroyed the Sultanate rule, almost destroyed the Mongol rule, forced the British to leave. I doubt a broad based information gathering system then.

So, how did these things happen and how did we fare better then than we are doing now? I will leave this question open to visitors.

I doubt the middle class will do anything to save the nation. Although they have the means, they feel the pangs of the nation being tore asunder by forces beyond their control, they have all the reason to stay quiet. A few genuinely concerned people will continue to struggle nonetheless. Anything that doesn't involve the masses will fail.

About information, how many would sincerely sit down and absorb all that is out there? How should an average person reading something for the first time confirm the veracity of facts? What or who will motivate him to get involved after getting informed and inspired?

Somewhere, people have left out the elephant in the room in their quest to reform India. In fact two elephants. The two elephants that Chanakya did not miss. Check the following videos:

(Edited on 31st October, 8:16 pm. At the advice of Karmasura, and since none have taken up the conversation so far, I am expanding on the following videos and what they mean in the present day context for India so as to make my point clearer to the audience)

1) Chanakya's speech at Kaikayiraj Sabha.

This is a speech Chanakya makes in the conference room of Kaikayiraj. Karmasura had provided the translation of this post here for the same purpose as mine. The purpose is to rally up support following the Greek invasion from different quarters of the society. Chanakya says that an important pillar of any society is the education system and its participants i.e. the teachers. To paraphrase, the lesson from the video is that a teacher should feel proud only when the nation is victorious. The nation will be victorious when its values and customs will be maintained. This is possible by the nation when the teacher follows his duties. Thus, to reform India, we need to reform the teacher, and the education system and instill them with a nationalist zeal. There is also a suggestion for arming the teacher and militaristic training in schools and rebellion against the state if force is required to restore national pride. Most likely, there will not be any need of a rebellion to reform India, but the military drill can instill good health among the youth, and good health will enhance productivity, and also keep them from stupor and other ills in the society.

2) Chanakya's speech to a friend's mother.

This video was also translated by Karmasura here. Chanakya talks to a mother of a person who wishes to volunteer for the revolt against the Greeks. The issue was about getting recruits to fight against the Greeks. Chanakya's younger brother wishes to join the military but his mother refuses to. In the video, Chanakya says that if a mother is attacked, her sons will not stay quiet. So, if the motherland is attacked, why should her sons stay quiet? This wins her over, and gets his younger brother to join the army. The video is a showcase of the powerful influence of a mother in a family. While the father is away at work for most of the day, it is from the mother that a child does basic schooling. Many great people on this god forsaken third rock have shown great regard for the lessons they have learnt from the mother. Thus, if the mother is instilled with a patriotic zeal, she will instill the same in her sons and daughters, and they will not betray her teachings when they grow older. And, an extra effort to train today's mothers is needed, because once the part in no. 1 is established, the resultant human females from the education system will have automatically imbibed the patriotic spirit.

Once the spirit of nationalism is instilled, people will be automatically inspired to get informed and then get involved in participating in national activities. No effort needs to be done to invoke the 3 "I"s as has been mentioned by Shantanuji in the video.

These two, I think, will do a tremendous good for the upliftment of the nation, rather than specifically bombarding the middle classes.

Understanding the Cosmic Dance in the Divine Amphitheatre: Sharad Poornima

Borrowed from a friend, and I have kept the whole note intact without any modifications. This is on understanding the Raas Leela and specially for those who have been thinking that Lord Krishna's Raas-Leela has sexual connotations.

~

Indian legends have it that Krishna danced with milkmaids on the banks of the river Yamuna on the full moon night of autumn. This dance is referred to as Raas-Leela. Western theologians tread this subject with caution, some ascertaining a sexual connotation to the mystery behind it. Indian philosophers have tried to read between the lines focusing on the symbolism of the same, digging for deeper spiritual meaning. To understand Raas-Leela, the dance of celebration, what is first necessary to know is that the whole of life is a meeting of contradictory forces, and that all its happiness comes from this union of the opposites. The very mystery and ecstasy of life lies hidden in this unio mystica. To begin with, it is good to understand the metaphysical meaning of the celebration that our universe holds. And then, together, we will go into the life of Krishna, a complete miniature of this celebrating universe.

Raise your sights and look at whatever is happening all around in this vast universe of ours. Is it anything other than a dance, a celebration, an abounding carnival of joy? It is all celebration, whether it is clouds gliding in the heavens or rivers rushing to the seas or seeds on their way to becoming flowers and fruit, or bees humming or birds on the wing or love affairs between men and women. It is all a panorama of play and dance and celebration.

Raas has a universal meaning; it has a cosmic connotation and significance.

Firstly, the meeting of opposite energies is the cornerstone of all creation, of the universe. To construct a house with a door, we put an arch at the top of the door with the help of opposite shapes of bricks to support it. It is just this placing of opposite kinds of bricks in the arch that upholds not only the door but the whole building. If we use uniform kinds of bricks in the arch, it will be impossible to construct a house. In the same way, the whole play of creation, at every level of life, begins when energy becomes divided into two opposite parts. This division of energy is at the root of all creation, of all life in the universe, and with the cessation of this division all life's play comes to a full stop. When the same energy becomes one, when it returns to its primordial state, total destruction, the ending of the universe happens. And when the same energy again divides itself into two, creation begins anew.

Raas, the dance of celebration, is the most profound attribute of the mighty stream of creation. And creation in itself is the interplay of polar opposites -- thesis and antithesis. When opposites collide with each other it results in conflict, hostility and war, and when they embrace each other there is love and friendship. Without the meeting of the two, creation is impossible. So we have to go into the significance of Krishna's raas in this context.

It is not all that we see when Krishna dances with the gopis, the milkmaids, but we can see only that much with our gross eyes. Krishna's raas with the milkmaids of his village is not an ordinary dance, on a small scale it really represents the universal dance of creation that, since eternity, goes on and on. It epitomizes the everlasting drama of the making and unmaking of the universe. It gives you a glimpse of that divine dance and that immense orchestra.

It is for this reason that Krishna's maharaas ceases to have a sexual connotation. If one literally believes the texts, Krishna was eight years old at the time of the maharaas on the full moon in autumn. It is hard to imagine any sexual interpretation in the mind of an eight year old. And he danced with the gopis. The term "gopi" in Sanskrit means someone who has turned inward to derive pleasure. Such milkmaids who have turned inward would not derive pleasure from ordinary sex. In reality or wider interpretation Krishna does not dance as a mere Krishna, he represents the whole of the male element in creation, known in Sanskrit as purusha. And similarly the gopis represent the entire female element, prakriti. The maharaas represents the combined dance of prakriti and purusha. People who take the maharaas as a sexual representation of life are mistaken; they really don't understand it. And I am afraid they will never understand it. To put it rightly, it is a dance of the meeting of the male and female energies, of purusha and prakriti. It has nothing to do with any individual man and woman; it represents the mighty cosmic dance.

Legend has it that it happened on the full moon night of autumn. The significance of autumn is the representation of balance; it's neither too hot nor too cold in autumn. The full moon represents completeness. The maharaas is Yog, merging of the individual self into the Supreme; call it Brahman, God, Nature, Higher Self or whatever you may. It is the dance of the electrons around the nucleus or the dance of the planets around the sun. The electrons are equally and oppositely attracted to the nucleus and so are the planets to the sun. Their relationship is unique and can be very well represented by the maharaas. Rutherford's model of the atomic structure or Copernicus's and Kepler's model of the solar system can easily be explained by the maharaas that was either conceived, or who knows, happened, thousands of years ago. The gopis represent the electrons and the planets and Krishna, the nucleus and the Sun, respectively.

It is because of this that a single Krishna is shown to dance with any number of gopis. Ordinarily it is not possible for a single man to dance with many women at a time. Ordinarily no man can be in love with many women together, but Krishna does it, and does it beautifully. It is amazing that every milkmaid, every gopi taking part in the maharaas, believes that Krishna is dancing with her, that he is hers. It seems Krishna has turned into a thousand Krishnas so that he pairs off with each of the thousand women present there. It is just a representation, an imagination to make humankind understand the great mysteries of chemistry and physics and astronomy in the simplest terms.

It is utterly wrong to take the maharaas, the celebration dance of Krishna, as that of an individual person. Krishna is not a person here; he represents the great male energy, purusha. The maharaas is a representation in dance of the great meeting between male and female energies. But the question is: Why is only dance chosen as a medium for this representation? The medium of dance comes nearest to the mysterious, to the non-dual, and to celebration. Nothing can express it better than dance. The celestial dance is happening every moment, every second, in every atom and the ethereal cosmos, whether we see it or not.

Let us look at it in another way. Dance is the most primitive form of human language, because when man had not yet learned to speak, he spoke through gestures. If one man had to communicate with another, he made gestures with his face, his eyes, his hands and feet. Even today a dumb person only expresses himself through gestures. Verbal language came much later. Birds don't know a language, but they know how to chirp and dance together. Gestures make up the whole language of nature. It is used and understood all over. So there is a reason why dance came to center stage for the raas, the celebration.

Gesture is the most profound medium of expression because it touches the deepest parts of man's mind and heart. Dance reaches where words fail. The sound of the ankle bells of a dancer says a lot even where speech is ineffective. Dance is more articulate than anything else. A dancer can go from one end of the earth to another and will, more or less, make himself understood through his dance. No language will be needed to understand and appreciate him. No particular level of civilization and culture will be required to understand a dance. Dance is a kind of universal language; it is understood everywhere on this planet. Wherever a dancer goes he will be understood. Man's collective unconscious is well aware of this language.

To me, the great raas happening in infinite space, with millions of stars like the sun and moon dancing rhythmically, is not an ordinary dance. The atomic "dance" is now known to everyone. It is not meant for entertainment; it is not show business. In a sense it should be described as overflowing bliss. There is such an abundance of bliss in the heart of existence that it is flowing, overflowing. That is what we call the river of existence. The presence of the polar opposites in the universe facilitates its flow.

There is a significant saying of Nietzsche's. He says, "It is out of chaos that stars are born." Where there is no system, no order, only the interplay of energies remains. In this interplay of energies, which is raas, Krishna and his milkmaids cease to be individuals, they move as pure energies. And this dance of opposite energies together brings deep contentment and bliss; it turns into an outpouring of joy and bliss. Rising from Krishna's raas this bliss expands and permeates every fiber of the universe.

Although Krishna and the gopis are no more with us as people, the moon and the stars under which they danced together are still with us, and so are the trees and the hills and the earth and the skies that were once so drunk with the bliss of the raas. So, although millenia have passed, the vibes of the maharaas are still with us.

Now scientists have come forward with a strange theory. They say although people come and go, the subtle vibes of their lives and their living remain suffused in existence forever. If someone goes to dance on the grounds in Vrindavan where Krishna once danced with his gopis he can hear the echoes of the maharaas even today. If someone can play a flute near the hills that in the past echoed with the music of Krishna's flute, he can hear those hills still echoing it, everlastingly.

In my view, the raas symbolizes the overflowing, outpouring of the primeval energy as it is divided between opposites. And if we accept this definition, the raas is as relevant today as it was in the times of Krishna. Then it becomes everlastingly relevant. May we always be blissful and perceive this cosmic dance, not just on the full moon of autumn (Sharad Poornima), but every day, every moment. May this maharaas fill us with joy and peace. Greetings on this auspicious festival!

~

Sharad Poornima (The autumn full moon) was yesterday on the 22nd October.

C.G. Jung on India

Been reading Jung of late. Following are few excerpts from the book "Psychology and the East" by renowned psychologist Carl Gustav Jung on what things India can teach the West (and these days, itself). For a first visit (in December 1937), he makes many good points which some of us are fast forgetting. I do not find fault with him yet for having wrong observations on the Indian dhoti (he thinks people cannot fight in it, perhaps he had not seen Kalaripayattu being practiced) and studying Buddhism separately, since he had little time to explore India properly. I however find two of these excerpts very important.

Below is an excerpt from the chapter "What Indians can teach us". Jung feels that Indians do not think as a Westerner does, but he perceives his thinking. In that way, he resembles a primitive person.
~

"I am now going to say something which may offend my Indian friends, but actually no offence is intended. I have, so it seems to me, observed the peculiar fact that an Indian, in as much as he is really Indian, does not think, at least not what we call "think". He rather perceives the thought. He resembles the primitive in this respect. I do not say that he is primitive, but that the process of his thinking reminds me of the primitive way of thought production. The primitive's reasoning is mainly an unconscious function, and he perceives its results. We should expect such a peculiarity in any civilization which has enjoyed an almost unbroken continuity from primitive times."

~

I am not quite sure how a Westerner thinks, but I do think by perceiving my thought, and imagining the results of my actions. But Jung says that this thought of the Westerner is the outcome of a split between the conscious and the unconscious personalities of a person, and while the Westerner tamed the conscious side, the unconscious remained barbarous. He adds that this is the reason why inspite of being technologically superior and scientifically advanced, the Occident can commit ferocious atrocities on human life. The Indian thought in comparison comes from having a union of the conscious and the unconscious sides, and his view of life is wholesome.

Jung also warns of the collapse of Eastern culture in "The Holy Men of India". This section on pages 184-6 of the book reads much like high school essays on the ill effects of Western life, but is one of the most relevant part of Jung's observations on the Orient:

~

"The Eastern peoples are threatened with a rapid collapse of their spiritual values, and what replaces them cannot always be counted among the best that the Western Civilization has produced. From this point of view, one could regard Ramakrishna and Shri Ramana as modern prophets, who play the same compensatory role in relation to their people as that of the Old Testament prophets in relation to the "unfaithful" children of Israel. Not only do they exhort their compatriots to remember their thousand year old spiritual culture, they actually embody it and thus serve as an impressive warning, lest the demands of the soul be forgotten amid the novelties of Western civilization with its materialistic technology and commercial acquisitiveness. The breathless drive for power and aggrandizement in the political, social, and intellectual sphere, gnawing at the soul of the Westerner with apparently insatiable greed, is spreading irresistibly in the East and threatens to have incalculable consequences. --- snip --- The externalization of life turns to incurable suffering, because no one can understand why he should suffer from himself. No one wonders at this insatiability, but regards it as his lawful right, never thinking that the one-sidedness of this psychic diet leads in the end to the gravest disturbances of equilibrium. That is the sickness of Western Man, and he will not rest until he has infected the whole world with his own greedy restlessness. "

~

Jung is greatly influenced by Ramana Maharishi to whom he had been introduced by Heinrich Zimmer through this book. Zimmer seems to be a bigger enthusiast on India, whom we will explore later if time and resources permit. Jung feels that solving the above problem of Western Culture can be done through a study of the East.

~

" The wisdom and mysticism of the East have, therefore, very much to say to us, even when they speak their own inimitable language. They serve to remind us that we in our culture possess something similar, which we have already forgotten, and to direct our attention to the fate of the inner man, which we set aside as trifling and teaching of Shri Ramana are of significance not only for India, but for the West too. They are more than a document humain: they are a warning message to a humanity which threatens to lose itself in unconsciousness and anarchy. It is perhaps, in the deeper sense, no accident that Heinrich Zimmer's last book should leave us as a testament, the life work of a modern Indian prophet who exemplifies so impressively the problem of psychic transformation"

~


On the above, anything that becomes a positive feedback loop will keep growing larger, until it burns out the resources and gets destroyed on its own. The solution to such a problem is for us to remove the causative factors before the burn out time arrives or device an inhibiting mechanism that converts it into a negative feedback control system and makes our culture of today arrive at an equilibrium. The path that Western Culture has put us on and it itself is on is a positive feedback cycle. At some point, this has to end or it will end us. The destruction of today's culture of never ending desire and greed is not only a moral problem, but is proven to be similar to problems in science and biology as well and it will be no surprise if it goes in a similar fashion.

How to solve the problem?

I do not know yet. Perhaps the awareness that this is wrong and needs to be corrected is sufficient to satiate today's desires. Perhaps more is required? To answer that must be one of the objectives of this blog.