(Talk
delivered on 7 November 2005 at the India International
Centre on
National Conference on Global Peace through Universal Responsibility)
'Until you make the unconscious conscious, it will direct your
life and you will call it fate'. - Carl Jung
"Those
who can make you believe absurdities can make you
commit atrocities." - Voltaire.
A mouth that prays, a hand that kills. - Arab proverb
"How do you find a lion that has swallowed you?" asked
Swiss psychologist, Carl
Jung, commenting on the moral dilemma posed by the "shadow," his
insightful term
for the dark, hidden side of the human psyche.
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
The
subject of this talk would not interest the majority of the
people
who go through
the humdrum of Indian
existence
without trying to look for anything beyond the travails of
their existence. To that extent the debate remains esoteric,
in that it encompasses, wholly, or in parts, religion, faith,
spirituality, science and philosophy. For most people the
world over religion comprises practices, rituals and worship
centering on a supreme being. Yet, childlike innocence encompasses
the same reality that informs the enlightenment experience.
There are no dissonances at either extremes of the spiritual
quest – the infinite enfolds it at the beginning and
at the end. While most religions have a shared belief in
divine power and a code of conduct can be found in their
writings the pinnacle of spiritual attainment must embody
the quality of compassion. Fortunately for India the tradition
continues.
Today
one of its greatest exponents is the Dalai Lama, the itinerant
monk who has internalized
the acute sufferings
of his people to reinforce his compassion. Remarkably, for
it is the quintessence of compassion, his effulgence embraces
in equal measure the tormenters of his people. The Chinese
leaders – never the people of China – may have
denounced him from every pulpit. The Dalai Lama enfolds the
oppressors of his people with the same benign gaze as he
does the rest of the world. Going beyond his individual spiritual
attainment, he has been turning his attention to the synthesis
between science and spirituality, because without a grand
fusion of the two streams humankind might continue to be
beset with dilemmas to which no satisfactory answer might
be easily forthcoming.
That
is why it is perplexing to note that a group of U.S. neurologists
have raised objections
to plans for the exiled
Tibetan leader
to open their annual convention, on the dubious plea that a
non-scientist has no place lecturing them about science. Several
hundred members of the Society for Neuroscience petitioned
the organization to rescind its invitation to the Buddhist
leader, invited to deliver the inaugural address at their November
(2005) conference in Washington. “What I object to is
having a non-scientist address a scientific community about
science,” said a neurobiologist. About 30,000 scientists
from around the world were expected to attend the Neuroscience
2005 conference, where more than 17,000 neurology-related research
presentations and over 50 symposia were scheduled. The Dalai
Lama is to address the group on the neuroscience of meditation,
based on the work of American researchers looking to see whether
the intense meditation practiced by Buddhist monks can generate
positive emotions.
This
episode – even
if one discounts orchestration by Chinese interests – is
disconcerting for several reasons, not necessarily connected with the persona
of the Dalai Lama. That a full seven hundred learned scientists actually appended
their signature to this petition on the grounds that a person of the eminence,
wisdom, learning and spirituality of the Dalai Lama, a Nobel Prize winner to
boot, must be made unwelcome on the ground that a non- scientist has no contribution
to make to their discipline is truly stupefying. Does it follow that, in turn,
a scientist must never participate in any discussion not connected with that
person’s discipline? The narrowness of this approach on the part of such
a large number of luminaries from the field of neurosciences is utterly incomprehensible.
It represents a paradigm shift away from the very foundation of scientism – the
quest for exploring every phenomenon that could have a bearing on the outcome.
In this particular case the hypothesis on which the Dalai Lama would be making
his presentation should normally have been of more than passing interestto
neuroscience, since it deals, above all, with the mental faculty.
In
the great scientific–spiritual
debates of the earlier centuries the discussion mostly revolved
round science and spirituality or science and religion.
At times they caused bitter rifts between the exponents of one or the other,
seeking primacy for their respective fields. Taking an overview of the debates
that raged through the centuries it transpires that differences have been
quite pronounced, excluding, of course, names of some of the
more famous philosophers
and scientists who sought to bring about a teleological convergence. Many
of the latter were greatly influenced by the study of Vedic
literature, which
had become fairly well known in informed European circles by the 19th century.
Erwin Schroedinger, who in 1925 hypothesised that the waves of electrons
also could be quantized was one such person.
Here
note has to be taken of Heisenberg’s Principle of Indeterminacy
or the ‘Uncertainty Principle,’ as it is better known. In 1927,
Werner Heisenberg had explained that not only was the electron picture a
blurred one, but that the electron itself was unknowable through any possible
scientific
experiment. For, in order to know an electron, we must know where it is,
and what its velocity is. He thought that this placed an insurmountable difficulty,
for both these could not be known together. Heisenberg explained this difficulty
by means of ‘thought experiment’ or what he termed, in German
language, a ‘Gedanken experiment,’ elaborating that in order
to see something, we have to use light, having wavelength smaller than the
thing to be seen.
So, in order to spot out an electron, which is extraordinarily small, we
would require gamma rays because these have the shortest wavelength. Now,
Einstein
had already shown in his study of photoelectric effect that the electrons
are knocked out whenever ultraviolet rays meet them.
So,
when a super-microscope is set to detect the fast-moving
electron
in its orbit around the nucleus,
the powerful gamma rays from the microscope, while illumining the electron,
would violently knock out the electron from its orbit and would bring about
change in its direction and speed. Heisenberg opined that this change in
direction
and momentum would be uncontrollable and unpredictable, stating that the
real nature of electron would remain shrouded in uncertainty. He went on
to say
that the electrons do not exist as individual entities but as ‘electron
cloud’, so the nature of an individual electron cannot be known;
we can have only statistical averages of a vast number of electrons taken
together.
He concluded that we cannot observe the subatomic world without altering
it
and we cannot give its objective description.
The
other implication, derived from Heisenberg’s Principle of Uncertainty was that the cause-and-effect
relationship does not apply to the Quantum or the subatomic world. Einstein,
however, could never accept the incertitude regarding the knowledge of
the electron and its movement as final. He argued that if we can know a
baseball,
or an automobile or a projectile, we should also know an electron. As a
response to the Uncertainty Principle, he often said: “God does not
play dice”.
Einstein also opposed the idea of indeterminism. Along with his two associates,
Podolsky and Rosen, he formulated a mathematical paradox, known as EPR
paradox, through which he tried to prove that quantum indeterminism was
false. Einstein
thought that there must be a ‘hidden variable’, which is responsible
for this uncertainty. Einstein believed that, as a rule, there should not
be any indeterminacy in the realm of physics. Although until his death
he could
not find such ‘hidden variable’, he, however, did not give
up his opposition to the Principle of Uncertainty or indeterminacy.
Heisenberg’s
Principle of Uncertainty shook the physicists – metaphysics
as well - as it was an unexpected discovery. Up to that time it had been
thought that Physics was an exact science and that things happened in a
definite way
according to the law of cause and effect. Einstein, Max Born, Neils Bohr,
Wolfgang Pauli, Schroedinger and many other quantum physicists had a conference
at Copenhagen
where Neils Bohr gave his ‘Concept of Complementarity’. Although
most of the scientists accepted this interpretation of the quantum phenomena,
Einstein refused to accept the Principle of Uncertainty as final.
Having
touched upon the concept the Heisenberg’s Principle of Uncertainty,
one can revert briefly to the more recent branch of physics, known as
Particle Physics. Einstein had propounded that mass of a particle increases
with
its velocity. Later scientists hypothetically calculated the ‘rest-mass’ of
an electron. They concluded that the mass of an electron would increase,
as its speed would increase. Particle Physicists have divided all sub-atomic
particles,
according to their masses, into three main categories: Light weight particles
- Leptons; medium weight particles – Mesons; and heavy weight particles
- Baryons.
Photons
do not belong to this framework. Up to the present Particle
physicists have
mentioned the existence of about 200 sub-atomic
particles.
Some of these have been discovered, others have only been theorized
and are arbitrarily known as ‘massless particles’. Most of the
particles have an incredibly short life and size. For example, a positive
electron lasts
only 10-8 seconds. In their experiments on high-energy particles, physicists
have come across particles, which live only a few particle-second where
a particle-second is 10-23 second or 0.00000 00000 00000 00000 0000 second.
At the end of this
incredibly small period, they change into other particles. The particle
that lives for the shortest period is called ‘Resonance”.
Since its existence is extremely short, some like to call this as ‘an
event’ rather
than ‘an object’.
When
known particles collide with very high velocity, sometimes
nearing
that of light, new
particles are formed.
The collision or interaction
of sub-atomic
particle results in ‘annihilation’ of the original particles
and the ‘creation’ of new sub-atomic particles. This process
of ‘destruction’ and ‘creation’ goes
on in outer space. So small and so short-lived are particles at the
microphysical or sub-atomic level that a sub-atomic or microphysical
particle according
to Schroedinger cannot be observed twice. Heisenberg in his Principle
of Uncertainty
had maintained that a sub-atomic particle could not be observed even
once. It is possible that some time in the future instruments may be
devised that
might enable their study. What Heisenberg had deduced was more the
result of a ‘mental experiment’ – a ‘Gedanken
experiment’ as
he called it. He had followed Einstein’s advice, when the latter
told him that it is the theory that determines the form and nature
of experiment.
Hence, in the years to come it may be possible to have a new theory
that enables new mental experiments (Gedanken) and a new mathematical
formula
that enables
a better understanding about the electrons and other sub-atomic particles.
The
word ‘understanding’ itself needs further analysis. In
1922, when Heisenberg was walking with Neils Bohr, along the slopes
of Hain mountain
in Germany one afternoon he put many questions to Neils Bohr, one of
which was; “If the inner structure of an atom is as close to
descriptive accounts, as you say, if we really lack a language for
dealing with it,
how can we ever
hope to understand atoms?” After deep thought for a moment, Neils
Bohr said; “I think we may yet be able to do so. But in the process
we may have to learn what the word ‘understanding’ really
means”.
Earlier,
Laplace (1749-1827) also had said it emphatically that things
do happen and must
happen in a ‘deterministic’ and ‘certain’ way.
Other scientists also, until Heisenberg enunciated his principle, believed
that if we know the position of its parts at one particular instant, we would
be able to specify the whole thing or event. Laplace had expressed his deterministic
view in the following words: “We ought then to regard the present state
of the universe as the effect of its antecedent state and the cause of the
state that is to follow. An intelligence knowing at any given instant of time
all forces acting in nature, as well as the momentary positions of all things
of which the universe consists, would be able to comprehend the motions of
the largest bodies of the world and those of the smallest atoms in one single
formula provided it was sufficiently powerful to subject all data to analysis;
to it nothing would be uncertain; both future and past would be present before
its eyes.” The Laplace formulation tantalizingly parallels
the ability of the Vedic seers, trikaldarshis, to comprehend the
three elements of time.
The aspect needs to be dwelled into. It comes closest to the realm
of metaphysics and the spiritual experience.
We
come then to the Law of Cause & Effect at the sub-atomic level. It might
be incorrect to presume that Heisenberg’s Principle of Uncertainty demolished
the pillar of causality. Einstein may have been justified in saying that the
principle of Uncertainty was not acceptable as the final word on the subject.
One conclusion of Heisenberg’s views was that the act of
observation by the scientist alters the condition of the quantum
particles that are observed.
In
1933, Einstein said that the discovery of a ‘hidden variable’ would
account for it. In 1961, Eugene Wigner, a Nobel physicist, proposed that it
is the ‘consciousness of the scientist which is itself the hidden variable
that decides the outcome of the event. Wigner emphasised that it would be impossible
to give a description of quantum mechanical processes without the explicit
reference to the ‘consciousness’ of the observing scientist. Since
then other scientists have also felt that, at the sub-atomic level, objective
truth cannot be known because the objective reality there is inextricably affected
by the subjective consciousness of the scientist. Here it would be interesting
to again bring in Schroedinger, who said: “Attempt to resolve the dualism
of mind and matter was also attempted in the west, but the attempt was carried
always on the material plane and, therefore, it failed… It is odd that
it has usually been done on material basis… but this is no good. If we
decide to have only one sphere, it has to be the psychic one since that exists
anyway.” Compare this with a yogi who empties his mind of
all thoughts to observe, or rather intuit, phenomenon without interfering
with them through
a focused gaze that could disturb the phenomenon.
At
the present time most discussions on the subject center round
the Unified-field
theory.
Albert Einstein, who had enunciated the
particle-nature
of light
and matter, was, perhaps, the first who thought of the unified-field
theory. He
wanted to formulate a theory that could explain that all the forces
of nature are, in reality, various manifestations of one same force.
Though
some attempts
towards unification of some forces had already been made, it was
Einstein who thought of unifying all the forces. Physicists are
now dreaming
of a Super-unified-field
theory or Super-unified Quantum theory. But, in the meantime, some
other physicists have detected the existence of an Anti-Gravity-Force
that
is about 1/10,000
of the force of Gravity and is opposed to Gravity. Perhaps, they
will now have to integrate that force also in the same theory.
Attempts for unification
are
going on. As Stephen Hawking the famous astrophysicist at Cambridge
says the super-unification of the forces of the universe “is the most out-standing
problem in theoretical physics at the present time”. He adds: “It
seems very reasonable to suppose that there may be some unifying principles,
so that all laws are part of some bigger law from which all laws can be derived”.
The
very elementary recounting of the broad concepts of particle
physics
related to the Indeterminacy
Principle, ultimately leading – it is hoped – to
the grand unified field theory became necessary to a paradox which
science bereft of the spiritual leap might not be in a position
to overcome. The fact
is that in its present state of development the human mind is simply
not equipped to conceive of more dimensions, and certainly
not nine, ten or eleven. Even
one additional dimension, for that matter, would be mentally inconceivable.
However, it might be possible to intuit these through deep psychic
insights approximating the Buddha experience of enlightenment.
It
is known that many seekers have generally appreciated that
the highest
spiritual experience
is beyond the ken of the senses and
the intellect.
It is not easy
for the human mind to fathom the working of divine grace due to
its tendency to rationalize its experiences. That might be the
reason
that faith in
God becomes the basis of spiritual life. When a devotee wanted
to know from Ramakrishna
Paramhamsa whether he too could attain the mystic state that the
saint often experienced, the latter replied that he would not be
able to
withstand it.
Unless it is divinely revealed in a blinding flash of illumination – as
has been recorded in the case of some great seers - spiritual experience being
very subtle, it requires a lot of preparation and possibly years of patience
to attain the mystic state. One has to progress very gradually and appreciate
that many spiritual experiences go beyond the average person’s
level of evolution.
CENTRAL DILEMMA
Superimposing
the metaphysical dimension on the global canvas much of
the violence that has recently
taken place across continents has a religious basis. Where
violence has not irrupted on a large scale the underlying tensions have
centred on denominational differences, largely between
Muslims and Christians. Muslims
and Hindus only on the subcontinent and nowhere else. It has been fashionable
to attribute these differences to fringe elements rather than to intelligently
directed, well-funded, supra-national zeal. What is being witnessed today
has developed into a clash of religions. To term it as a ‘clash of
civilizations’ is misleading and prevents a more incisive analysis
of the phenomenon, erupting with such regularity in many parts of the
world. It is the endeavour in this paper to look at the globality of
this distressing
turn of events at the dawn of the new century. The focus will be on India
with special reference to the spatial regression of the Indic heritage
in large parts of the subcontinent, where it had survived a millennial
onslaught
of foreign domination before India became independent. It is frightening
that in just six decades after independence Hinduism has been pushed
out from large tracts of the subcontinent, especially in the west and
the north
and more recently in Bangladesh in the East. What is worse, should this
trend remain unchecked it will further shrink the geographical space
where the
Vedic heritage had first manifested itself in its full resplendence -
to enrich the philosophical and spiritual roots of world civilization.
Even
in the restricted space available to it in truncated India - where the
space is being further eroded - it is unable to express itself unabashedly
and
unapologetically. The looming danger in this regard is to the Indic denominations
as also to the spiritual heritage of the world.
This
conclave comes at a time when the increasingly volatile situation
within the country and without practically demands a reformulation
of religious attitudes
in a world that is using religion to further cherished geopolitical goals.
As far as it concerns India, the country was partitioned along religious
lines. Over the decades since Independence many of the seemingly intractable
problems
on the subcontinent have religious underpinnings, to the extent that
religious militancy has been instrumental through various
geostrategic twists and
turns in inducing foreign forces to set up military bases on the subcontinent.
Today,
when one talks of threats to India from its neighbours or some of the
internal threats, these, in many ways, ipso facto translate
into threats to Hinduism
or on another plane as threats to the Vedic heritage of the subcontinent
- a heritage that had developed over several millennia. It was free
from religious
strife that was virtually unknown in those earlier times. It came to
these parts only after the advent of the later religions.
The latter ended up
by enslaving India for over a millennium.
India’s
Vedic heritage is timeless, eternal. It can neither disappear
nor be diminished. Having said that, each generation is obliged to
find answers to the problems that afflict it at that point
in time. This is not only the
Karma Yoga enshrined in the Geeta. It is now an existential imperative.
Undoubtedly, Hinduism is being assailed from without and
buffeted from within. How should
it meet this challenge? Some pointers that could provide reasonable
answers in the prevailing conditions in India and on the
subcontinent are enumerated
below:
Radicalisation
of Hinduism or hard core Hindutva as expounded by certain
organisations is certainly not the answer. Hinduism must retain its
core philosophy of compassion,
tolerance and non-violence regardless of the threats being faced
from various directions.
The
threats that the Vedic heritage faces today in the land of
its birth,
encompassing the entire subcontinent from the Indian Ocean to the
Hindukush and Tibet are
real. Potentially, they are as grave as any faced in earlier times.
These threats have to be countered by the instrumentalities of the state that
are designed
to deal with them, as for any sovereign state. If need be, these
instrumentalities can be further strengthened and expanded till the danger
has been definitely
warded off.
Meanwhile,
it is the duty of the Indian State and every citizen of India
to ensure that regardless of differences
that might have arisen between
the communities due to politically inspired exacerbations or on account of
the present global
environment that no citizen of any community is harmed or lives
in fear. Engendering fear, even if there were to be no physical harm, should
be as abhorrent as
physical harm.
Concomitant
with the strengthening of the security organs of the state
the Government – both
at the Centre and the States – has to ensure
that women’s emancipation and education of the girl child
are given the highest priority. No communal organizations,
communally minded politicians
or individuals should be allowed to stand in the way.
Population
stabilization across the length and breadth of the subcontinent
must become a SAARC priority.
Indians have to boldly articulate the likely outcome of the
demographic shifts being induced in the subcontinent, almost
exclusively
to India’s disadvantage.
Unless a clear strategy is formulated to alter these trends
the forces aligned against syncretism will be strengthened
immeasurably at the cost of India.
The clear danger arising from the demographic exclusion of
non-Muslims from large parts of the subcontinent and neighbouring
regions, while at the same
time pushing in of people who denominationally have the potential
to be hostile to India is a grave threat, which needs to
be countered urgently and decisively.
At
this point it becomes essential to address the central
dilemma that the Vedic heritage of the country is faced
with. It is
one that has
bedeviled its
foremost exponents, thinkers and practitioners since the
time that India came under foreign domination. The dilemma,
which
remained
un-addressed for a thousand
years, has now transformed itself into an existential imperative
at the
start of the third millennium. It is where we stand today
trying to come to grips
with a problem, which, should it remain unresolved, could
see a sharp decline of the Indic tradition in the lands
whence it blossomed
forth
to enrich humans
with a philosophy of non-violence and co-existentialist
harmony that after several millennia remains perhaps the
only hope
for humankind
hurtling toward
self-annihilation – both for itself and the vast
majority of the species that co-habit the planet with the
humans.
This needs explanation.
By
the eleventh century Buddhism as a harmonizing, humanity-ennobling
philosophy had spread
in most parts of what is modern day
East, Central, South and Southeast
Asia. The university at Nalanda was perhaps the foremost
seat of learning in the world of that period. Something
similar may have
been happening
with the
other streams of the Vedic heritage. None of these streams
showed the least inclination for propagation or external
expansion
through
violence.
Yet, what
was the result of a millennium of relatively peaceful
co-existence? Because of this very passivity, Islam was able
to overwhelm
Bharatvarsh; with
the force of demonic violence being carried to new heights.
Not only were the countryside
and people mowed down by the invaders, the philosophy
of peaceful co-existence itself, that had blessed this land
over the preceding
millennium was
cast aside. The ferocity of the invaders was unprecedented.
The
result was that Buddhism was practically wiped out in the
land of its birth and
the other Vedic streams went into hibernation under
centuries long suppression.
V.S.
Naipaul is explicit: “The
millennium began with the Muslim invasions and the grinding
down of the Hindu-Buddhist culture of the north. This
is such a big and bad event that people still have
to find polite, destiny-defying ways of speaking about
it. In art books and history books, people write of the
Muslims “arriving” in India,
as though the Muslims came on a tourist bus and went
away again. The Muslim view of their conquest of India
is a
truer one. They speak of the triumph of
the faith, the destruction of idols and temples, the
loot, the carting away of the local people as slaves,
so cheap
and numerous that they were being sold
for a few rupees. The architectural evidence—the
absence of Hindu monuments in the north—is convincing
enough. This conquest was unlike any other before.
There are no Hindu records of this period. Defeated
people
never write
their history. The victors write the history. The victors
were Muslims. For people on the other side it is a
period of darkness.”
Nearer
our time, a bare three centuries ago, when the Europeans
came to India they repeated the
cycle of violence
and intolerance.
The
latter eased somewhat
when the post-renaissance winds of change swept Europe.
Both the religions - Christianity and Islam having
been in the
ascendant in the last millennium
and a half – were born in violence and spread
through violence. Their predominant urge has been an
admixture
of proselytisation and extermination.
So deeply ingrained have these tendencies become that
the possibility of a major change in the make-up of
these religions in the foreseeable future is
difficult to visualize. The discourse here relates
to their continuing expansionist urges.
It
brings us to the heart of the existential problem confronting
the followers of the Vedic tradition, especially
in India,
including those
who have taken
refuge in this country. The narration concerning
the advent of Islam and Christianity, more so the former,
since it
forms a
very large
segment of the population of
the subcontinent, is a factual historical narrative.
The bare facts are indisputable. Equally, it can
be
indisputably affirmed
that
having subjugated
many parts
of the world, these religions retain the same expansionist
momentum. That being the case, how should the followers
of the Vedic tradition
and its offshoots
confront this challenge, knowing full well that continuing
adherence to their cherished belief in Ahimsa could
lead to disasters of
magnitudes similar to
those in the past. No doubt countries have standing
armies to repel invaders. Seeing the neighbourhood
in which
it
lives, India
has
a large professional
army. It is all- volunteer.
Would
armed might, however, be sufficient to ward off the ever-
present danger
to the way of life cherished
by the vast majority
of its inhabitants? The number of men in uniform
or military might of itself cannot remain a sufficient
guarantor
of long- term stability
for
the continuance
of the Vedic heritage in the face of increasing onslaughts
from forces inimical to it. The danger is from beyond
its borders as well as
from within. One way
of confronting it would be through an attitudinal
change, whereby the tradition, or even the very philosophy
of non-violence, is
gradually shed and replaced
with the universal norm of physically extirpating
the
threat from its
roots - within the country and wherever else it manifests
itself.
The world as a
whole is moving in that direction.
The
question arises whether such an attitudinal change leading
to the rejection of the essential elements
of the Vedic tradition
that
are
part and parcel of
its distinctiveness would not change the nature
of India’s great humanist
tradition. Would it not then make it indistinguishable from those others who
attacked it in the past and still continue to do so? Should such a change be
orchestrated - for it would not come naturally to the majority of the Indian
people who cherish the ancient heritage of their country - would it not be
tantamount to elimination from the nation’s
psyche of all that India stood for since time immemorial,
for itself and for the world?
Putting
it in another way, the world has watched the Chinese strangulating
Tibet with a zeal that
puts them
beyond the
pale of human decency.
They appear to have become proof against the
suffering of the Tibetan people.
The last
fifty years have been witness to eco-savagery
and genocide. If the trajectory were to be plotted
for the next fifty
years along
similar
lines, the
Tibetan sacred space – a precious spiritual
heritage of mankind - would have been excoriated
from the Tibetan landmass.
On
the subcontinent, in the period since partition, the Vedic
heritage is regressing in like fashion.
It has
practically disappeared from
vast tracts to the West
right up to Afghanistan A parallel development
is taking place in Bangladesh in the East and
Kashmir Valley
in the North.
Left to itself
further
inroads will be made within remainder India.
What should be the response of the
practitioners of the Vedic tradition or its
offshoots, in
India, Tibet and elsewhere? Should
they emulate the savagery of the races that
held India in thrall for more than a thousand years?
Will
spirituality
on their
part change the nature of those
who thrive on violence? The paradox has to
be addressed. Debates will
neither resolve the dilemma nor prevent a worsening
of the
situation. Resolution lies
in action. What should be the nature of that
action?
Put
more starkly, it would not be difficult to visualize that
unless the present trajectory
of Chinese activities
in Tibet
can be halted
within a few decades
from now the last vestiges of Tibetan culture
would have been eradicated from its birthplace.
People
of the coming
generations
would not
even be able to
recall that there existed a Tibetan problem.
Something similar has already happened in
Pakistan and Bangladesh.
In the former,
Hindus
forming less
than one per cent of the population today
do not even constitute a minority. They
stand eliminated. Bangladesh is emulating
the Pakistan model. Hindus are now less than ten
percent of
a population that
just four decades
ago was well over
25 per cent. In the next four decades it
will be close to zero. Buddhists have suffered the
same
fate.
The
Chakma problem
has
been solved by
large-scale expropriation
of their land and large-scale rapes and killings. Meanwhile,
India itself is fast reeling under
unending influx
of elements that are
potentially hostile.
Fifty years from now the picture for the
followers of the Vedic tradition could become fairly
grim
if no remedial
action were
to be taken.
To believers
in ‘sarva
dharma sambhava’ what could be the
nature of that action, without destroying
the value system that defined Hindu dharma
through the ages? What part, if any, does
spirituality play in redressing the situation
in India or Tibet when
plain commonsense and the historical experience
unmistakably point in the opposite direction?
What part did spirituality play when the
Muslim invaders destroyed,
practically overnight, a millennial tradition
of vasudaiva kutumbakam?
Thomas
Asbridge in his book ‘The First Crusade: A New History’ has
this to say about the fall of Jerusalem: its capture, “left
the holy city awash with blood, its street
littered with mutilated corpses, the air
heavy with putrid stench of death. So great
had the massacre been that the
sheer weight of Muslim bodies left rotting
in the mid-summer sun threatened to overwhelm
the Latins with disease. The Christian
princes soon ordered that
the city be cleared. The handful of Muslim
survivors were forced into grim labour.
They dragged the dead Saracens out in front
of the gate, and piled
them up in mounds as big as houses. No
one has ever seen or heard of such a slaughter
of Pagans, for they were burned on pyres
like pyramids, and no one
save God alone knows how many there were.”
Savagery
of this type was repeated on a number of occasions by the
followers of
Islam and
Christianity on each
other, as well
as on
the inhabitants
of the lands they conquered. The history
of their clashes and conquests is replete
with stories of pillage, killing, enslavement
and conversions; to expect them to suddenly
become non-violent
would
be asking for an
impossible
transformation.
It calls into question – once again
- the ability of the practitioners of
ahimsa to withstand the pressures being
put on the truncated geographical
entity called India. It would be in the
fitness of things to mention here that
as late as 1947, i.e. till the partition
of the subcontinent of India the followers
of the Vedic streams could freely practice
their beliefs from Chittagong in the
east up to the Khyber - and even beyond
- in the west; and from Tibet in
the north to Sri Lanka in the south.
The massive spatial regression of the
Indic heritage has taken place over barely
five decades. Prior to that, for over
a thousand years, although there were
large-scale killings and the impositions,
the Indic heritage could never be eradicated
in toto as is currently taking
place in many parts of the subcontinent.
Even
humanism and goodness do not provide a way out of the moral
dilemma. Einstein
in a
letter
dated
June 23,
1953 (in
German)
wrote to Shinohara. “ I have
always condemned the use of the atomic bomb against Japan but I could not do
anything at all to prevent that fateful decision.” Einstein, whose Jewish
origins led him to flee Germany for the US in 1933, after Adolf Hitler came
to power, also said that war was sometimes acceptable. “I didn’t
write that I was an absolute pacifist but that I have always been a convinced
pacifist. That means there are circumstances in which in my opinion it is necessary
to use force,” he wrote. “Such a case would be when I face an opponent
whose unconditional aim is to destroy me and my people,” he said. “Therefore
the use of force against Nazi Germany was in my opinion justified
and necessary.”
Over
two centuries ago, Rousseau’s social contract helped
in making the political leaders conscious that in order to
retain their legitimacy they must
serve the public good. In the prevailing
situation today the political and business classes have to
factor in this advice in their respective spheres
of influence, while philosophers,
intellectuals, religious and spiritual leaders continue to
search for the meaning of life or the metaphysical abstractions
that have been the basis of their
enquiry since millennia. Ordinarily, religion
and spirituality should have gone
hand in hand. This, at least was the perception of the common
man up to the two World Wars in the west.
Today
it is certainly not the case. The growing religious indifference
in the
West could
be indicative of a
move away from spirituality
toward hedonism – or
possibly, despair. The people understand this. As commented by a leading US
publication, “the girls in St. Peter’s Square who cheer the Pope
have the pill in their pocket”. Quite a few religious leaders continue
to hold sway or even befool their flock without retaining an iota of spirituality
in them. Examples abound of leaders of sects who enjoy the adulation of their
followers while jet setting in the pleasure grounds of the world, racing horses,
with a bevy of glamorous companions – male and female – in
tow. Conversely, spiritual persons,
deeply revered for their spirituality,
may even
abjure religion in the accepted
sense of the word. In parts of
the world where religion has become
the handmaiden of the political
and geo-political urges
of religious and political leaders,
the very notion of spirituality
must have been ejected from their
fold.
Why
limit the politico-religious nexus to just these two entities?
In the
changed economic
paradigm, which
has held
the world
in thrall since
the demise of the
Soviet Union, it is the support
provided by
capital flows that allows the
politico–religious
affinities to pursue their dominance agendas. In most cases, if not in all
of them, religion negates the very basis of spirituality. Therefore, keeping
in mind the direction in which the reigning trinity of capital formation–assertive
religiosity–political skullduggery
are pushing the world spirituality
could soon fly away from the
planet.
Eyebrows
need not be raised at
what has been said. On the
face of it,
seeing the flow
of the misery-stricken
human
flotsam,
bereft of hope,
regardless of
whether above or below the
poverty line,
spirituality can be burned
at the stake of triumphant capitalism.
If hedonism
has
not been
embraced
by a larger
portion of humanity, it is
simply because they do not have the
means
to do so.
It does not
necessarily indicate
a
desire to
eschew hedonism.
It must be
clarified, however, that the
talk here is of the direction
in which
the
world is headed. It does not
apply to the few holdouts that
retain
the purity
of
their quest, as in the case
of the large number of
people
in this land, many others as
well, for whom compassion,
frugality and respect
for
mother earth
remain the cardinal virtues.
THE
CONTINUED RELEVANCE OF THE MAHATMA
Although
Gandhi continues to form an important part of the ongoing
political and economic
discourse taking place in the country, and elsewhere in
the world,
it has to be mentioned
that in spite of the ideals of the Mahatma quoted with reverence
at most forums discussing the future course of the country,
his economic
and political philosophy
has not really found acceptance, in so far as their practical
application goes. At the end of the day it is difficult
to
think
of an India that completely
dissociates itself from the maxims of the Mahatma, whether
they relate to governance, sustainable development, harmony
in pluralistic
societies or for the conduct
of nations in the global arena. It is not surprising that
Gandhi continues to attract the attention of so many people
around the
world, both as the man
and the ideals that he stood for.
Unfortunately,
the debate around the Mahatma, especially in India, rages
around elements that were never put into
practice in the land where they took birth.
Looking back on the events,
pre- and post-independence in India, one cannot fail
to get the impression that although he did not lose hope
or
his faith
in his ideals Gandhi
might have died a disillusioned man. If not disillusioned,
certainly
heartsick at the turn of events. Did the bloodletting
that took place
at the time of partition
in the land where for over four decades he had preached
ahimsa indicate that
his philosophy had failed? Was this not the land of Mahavira
and Buddha?
It
did not end with partition. The bloodletting continues
to this day, in every
part of the subcontinent.
If
present indications
are anything to go by it
could continue well
into the
future. It can be seen,
therefore, that the
ground reality
is almost diametrically
opposed to the Gandhian
values that so many
Indians continue to extol in
public forums, be they
intellectuals,
social workers, politicians
or economists. The
ordinary Indian too continues
to revere the
memory of the Mahatma.
When the state of affairs
threatens to get out
of hand people still
go to
Rajghat to take a pledge
at the samadhi of the
Mahatma.
The
increasing hiatus between Gandhianism
and the policies
followed by Gandhi’s
successors, regardless
of their political
leanings, raises
fundamental questions.
For the people of
India, and for people
around the world
there can be no perception
of India, real or
imagined, where the
ideals of the Mahatma
do not loom large.
How is this contradiction
to be reconciled?
Because, if it is
not addressed and
is merely glossed
over at every public
place within the
country and without,
where the name of
Gandhi is taken,
India will not be
able to emerge unscathed
from this troubling
dissonance between
the precept and its
practice.
Seeing
that India itself has veered
so far away
from the Gandhian
mould it should
have been
possible to reject
Gandhi’s
philosophy out
of hand and move
forward without
a backward glance
at an ideal that
was considered
impractical;
or could not be
put into effect
in a land were
shallowness, hypocrisy
and untruthfulness
have become the
order of the day,
at least in public
life. In which
case, getting rid
of the baggage
of Gandhianism
and getting on
with the governance
of the
country in the
non-Gandhian mould
should have been
easy.
This
has not been
the case. At
the same time
that untruthfulness
and venality
are in full cry, the
very
leaders
who have propelled
the country
in that direction
have not been
able to dispense with
the trumpeting
of
Gandhi’s
legacy because
of a lurking
fear that should
it be discarded
India would not
only
have lost its way, it would have lost its soul.
Then
there would be no turning back. The thought of that final
break, even shedding the pretence that is,
troubles these
peoples. They know that without the pretence they would not
be able to
face their countrymen, not at the hustings, not in public,
possibly not even in private. At a deeper level they are
not unaware that a final abandonment
of Gandhianism
would be tantamount to condemning themselves to a karmic
descent too horrid to contemplate. For, no matter how immoral
the lot that governs
the nation,
in their heart of hearts they are deeply religious, albeit
in a very warped sense of what their understanding of being
religious should be.
They also know
that in India the vast majority of their countrymen revere
the Mahatma and in spite of their poverty, deprivation and
misery still closely
adhere to the
thoughts and ideals of Gandhiji. For they are the ideals
of Vivekananda, Sri Aurobindo and so many other sages and
seers who moulded the character and
destiny of
India through the ages. That destiny that awaited India at
midnight of 15th August 1947 has still eluded the country.
Beneath the despair and turmoil
that afflicts
the land that destiny still awaits India. India will yet
produce the leaders who will take India to the pinnacle that
the Mahatma and the sages
before him
dreamed of. And therefore, the ideal cannot be lost sight
off. The ideal of Mahatma Gandhi is far too important for
the redemption of India, if
it is to find
its feet and its true destiny. For the very same reason it
is important for the world as well.
It
is necessary to go a step
further.
The reasons
as to why,
when the
majority
of Indians believe
in
it
and the political
leaders profess
to believe
in it, Gandhianism
has not
prevailed
in the country
of its origin
have to
be gone
into. The
main reason
could be
the difficulty
of transplanting
the Gandhian
ideal of
the early 20th
century.
Under an alien
dispensation
that ruled
the
country,
and because
of it being
alien, it
started uniting the
country
ideologically
in the earlier
decades
before independence.
The circumstances
that
obtained
post-independence
after the
partition of India
are not the
same. And
as the
years went
by, leading
ultimately
to the
dominant
market capitalist economy model pervading
the
world in
the 21st century,
the implementation
of
those
ideas became
even
more
difficult.
Firstly,
as mentioned
earlier,
the conditions
had altered
radically,
and secondly,
having moved
so far away
from the
Gandhian
philosophy
and its economic
derivatives
it
became increasingly
difficult
to retrace
the steps
taken. Having said
that,
the
attempts
at strengthening
panchayati
raj and the
adherence
to
the principle,
if not the
practice,
of sustainable
development
would
qualify as
a bow
in the direction
of Gandhi.
Meanwhile,
a fundamental
change
has taken
place in
the make
up of
the people
of India
- and the
world as
well. More
than
fifty years
after Gandhi’s
death, the capitalist model – and the morality or amorality that goes
with it - have become the norm. Even countries most staunchly opposed to it
earlier, have embraced it whole-heartedly, notably Russia and China. Could
people of those days when Gandhi was popularizing the charkha have anything
in common with Deng Xiao Peng’s famous exhortation to his countrymen: ‘it
is glorious to be rich’. If it is glorious to be rich, then there is
nothing left of the Gandhian philosophy. If not the masses, at least the political
class and the elites of modern India have embraced Deng’s
dictum
as fervently
as the
Chinese
in Beijing,
Shanghai
and Guangdong,
as strongly
as the
American
themselves.
Whatever
be the reason for this departure from socialism to capitalism,
it is
undeniable that going back to the economic idealism contained
in Gandhi’s
writings
would
relegate India to
an economic
abyss
from which there
would
be no recovery
in the
world
of today.
May be,
when
consumerism that is
fast
overtaking the globe
makes
life itself
unsustainable
on the
planet,
people
across
the world
will
start reappraising
the economic
philosophy
of Gandhi.
That
is why
the world
is not
going
to forget
Mahatma
Gandhi.
By association
India,
rightly
or wrongly,
will
benefit from that
grand
reversal, whenever
it takes
place
on a global
scale.
If India
is to remain
part of
the global
economy,
without
completely
shedding
some
of the
desirable
aspects
of its
socialist
past,
it
must
start
its own
reappraisal
for benefiting
from
the vision
of Gandhi
wherever
it is
possible
to transform
that
vision
on the
ground
under the
prevailing
conditions.
If the
world
has
to save
itself
from
self-destruction
Gandhian
non-violence
must
become
the leitmotif
of a
globalised
world,
and a
reformed
UN structure
that
allows
non-violence
between
states
to become
the norm for
the 21st
century.
It
was probably
Mahatma
Gandhi
who said: ‘for my worldly needs my village
is my world; for my spiritual needs the world is my village’.
To
project or even
propel
India
into
a future
which
many
people
view
with
trepidation
one
must look
over
one’s shoulder into the past. Not that remote past
from which many people today want to draw their inspiration - more consciously
than the ordinary consciousness that inheres in the minds of most Indians as
to what that past might have been. That would be going too far back. Here,
the past merely refers to the period after independence, divided into those
early years when many of the participants (at the discussion) were very young,
the Republic of India even younger. How did people of this generation look
at India at that time, as it was unfolding in the ever present and flowing
into a future that beckoned enticingly, even enchantingly. Doubtless there
were difficulties, trials and tribulations, which the nation was undergoing.
Whatever may have been happening, dejection and despair were not in the ascendant
to the same level that they are today. A few decades on, having journeyed with
India into the new century, the same generation has a different vision of India.
In spite of the remarkable progress made in many fields – and the achievements
are certainly there for everyone to see – the spirit that pervades the
nation seems to have lost the freshness and innocence, perhaps naiveté of
those
early
years.
What
India
has
evolved
into
in
the
first
decade
of
the
new
century
is
certainly
not
in
keeping
with
the
vision
of
what
India
should
have
evolved
into
that
people
in
the
first
decades
after
independence
cherished.
Here
we
come
to
the
first
dissonance.
India
has
gained
in
many
respects.
In
several
other
ways
it
has
declined.
How
does
one
strike
a
balance between
the
gains
and
losses
when
the
gains
are
in
the
material
plane
and
the
losses
in
planes
other
than
material?
Care
is
being
taken
to
avoid the
use
of
the
word
spiritual
when
chalking
up
the
gains
and
the
losses.
For
while
efforts
to
resurrect
the
hoary
past
merge
into
the
realm
of
the
spiritual,
the
understanding
of
spirituality
obtaining
now
in
India
-
and perhaps
the
rest
of
the
world
-
is
not
the
same
as
it
might
have
been
when
the
great
Vedic
hymns
to
creation
were
being
first
sung
on
the
banks
of
sacred
rivers
that
now
stand
as
polluted
as
the
spirits
of
the
souls
that
still
ritualistically
immerse
themselves
in
these
flows
to
seek
salvation.
Looking
at
it
this
way,
the
foremost
image
that
leaps
to
the
surface
in
the
consciousness
plane
of
the
beings
of
today
is
a
vast
sea
of
pollution
where
the
scum
that
rises
to
the
surface
represents,
symbolically,
the
spiritual
progress,
even
if
it
cannot
be
measured
so
as
to
be
able
to
offset
it
against
the
material
gains; represented
almost
exactly
on
the
day
of
the
discourse
by
a
figure of
143
billion
US
dollars
(the
external
reserves
of
the
country
in
early
October
2005).
Where
does one
go from
here? Should
the country
pitch headlong
into the
globalising mainstream
and let
the currents
carry it
in the
direction of
the new
forms of
nirvana, attained
by the
leaders of
globalisation -
the USA
and the
West, ably
followed by
their counterparts
in the
extreme east,
China and
Japan. Following
the leader,
in the
true spirit
of globalisation
and the
direction in
which it
is headed,
will prevent
people in
India from
falling between
two stools,
in this
world and
the next.
The dilemma
is very
real. There
are no
easy answers.
Having said
that, answers
have to
be found.
For it
is not
a question
of black
and white,
of simply
tossing a
coin and
then following
the path
indicated by
the upward
face of
the coin,
pointing towards
the sky,
the sun
and the
stars. It
may be
easier for
other countries
to do
so, like
China has
done. India’s
manifest destiny does not lie in that direction. It lies
in realms that can never be reached by true practitioners
of globalisation.
There
is a
need to
engage with
those who
belittle and
condemn India,
so that
their varied
and rich
talent does
not remain
tied to
an acerbic
condemnation of
their country – no matter how real their concern – in a language
that can only be appreciated by the educated elite and foreigners who joyously
lap up this condemnation and confer great honors upon the authors. Condemnation
for the sake of condemnation no matter how beautifully expressed is not likely
to lead to any real amelioration of the conditions that gave rise to the anger
or the condemnation. Writing in Young India in 1929, Mahatma Gandhi said: “My
mission is not merely brotherhood of Indian humanity… My patriotism is
not an exclusive thing… The conception of my patriotism is nothing if
it is not always, in every case without exception, consistent with the broadest
good of humanity at large.” Rabindranath Tagore said that while nationalism
was often a blessing, too often it has been a curse. The Indian philosophy
of Vasudeva Kutumbakam promotes the feeling of ‘one world’. Jawaharlal
Nehru propounded the concept of ‘Panchsheel’ as
the basis of mutual relationship.
The Bhagvad Gita and the Isavasyopanishad
tell us that the yogi
sees himself in all beings
and all beings in himself.
He sees the same in all. If
one sees all living things
as if they were in his body
i.e. feels their
joys and sorrows as his own,
and sees the same Universal
Spirit in all things then
there is no need for protecting
oneself
against others. When a man
understands
that all beings are, indeed, the
all-pervading Spirit, then
he realizes the oneness
of all things.
At
the dawn
of the
new millennium
after Christ,
when one
looks around,
it becomes
abundantly clear
that the
spiral of
violence within
societies, and
between nations,
has reached
a self-energizing
momentum that
might only
be stilled
by a
cataclysmic event,
the likes
of which
has not
been witnessed
before in
human experience.
Between
societies and
groupings that
cohere to
form nations
the ideal
situation that
must be
worked towards
would be
one where
the need
for primacy
does not
arise. Non-violence
appears to
be the
antithesis of
the global
reality in
today’s
world. Nevertheless, the concept of non-violence which can be deemed to be
the most profound contribution that ancient Indian thought made to the world
must regain its primacy, within India and without, if human society is to continue
to live in a civilized form. That the essential harmony of all sentient beings,
indeed sentience itself, as put forward by Mahavira, Buddha and many others
was made the basis for India’s
freedom struggle by Mahatma
Gandhi should not be looked
at in isolation, as a
mere reiteration of non-violence.
By introducing
the ancient precept into
the mainstream of the
anti-colonialism struggle
in India, Gandhi
may have been looking
well beyond to the universal
projection
of his innate belief in
the virtue of non-violence
as a survival imperative
for humanity, just when
scientific breakthroughs
were on the verge of putting
immensely destructive capabilities into the hands of mankind.
THE WAY FORWARD
The 21st century reality
of the unipolar world does not confer any leadership role upon
India, should the country remain wedded to the prejudices of
its earlier experience. If India wants to be heard, if it
wants
to strike out
independently for charting a course that propels the world away from
confrontation and the growing spiral of violence, it must adopt
as a nation the values
that enriched India in the past and continue to enrich mankind wherever
those values take root. Simply put, those values relate to
non-violence and self-abnegation.
The aspect of non-violence has already been touched upon. The point at
issue now is, as to whether self-abnegation or self-denial,
the greatest of human
virtues in an individual can be extended to a nation.
There
does not seem to be any other way. India is ideally positioned
to take the lead.
It must continue to make economic progress and strengthen
itself
internally and externally. However, having achieved these goals it should
deny itself a position at the top table. It should not hanker after
a permanent
seat in the United Nations Security Council, as that body is presently
structured. India should categorically state that it remains anchored
to the aspiration
of all Third World countries that are looking to change the lot of their
people;
be they mired in backwardness and poverty because they were the victims
of exploitation in the colonial era, or on account of misgovernance.
Having
been a part of that world, India must seek a collective betterment
for all the nations
who comprise the vast collectivity known as the developing nations. Either
they all benefit from the new dispensation, even if it were to be so
incrementally, over a given period of time, or they collectively
hold out for a more just
world order. India must assure them that it will not desert them no matter
how tempting the offer from the rich man’s club. In reshaping such
an ideal for India, the individual and national identity must aspire
to march together for a better self and a better world.
When
the Indian National Congress launched a campaign for all-out
independence from
the British Empire, it lacked an issue around which it could
rally
the people. Mahatma Gandhi who never held any political office but
served as
a sort of spiritual father of the movement, was instructed by his “inner
voice” to lead a Satyagraha – a “soul force” or “truth
force” campaign of civil disobedience - against the salt laws, which
had been in place long before the British arrived in India. Would it be possible
to replicate the Mahatma’s strategy in this day and age is the
question that needs to be addressed keeping in mind the cynicism that
prevails in
all walks of life wherever one looks.
A
writer in a recent article (TIME, August 15-22, 2005) poses
the
rhetorical question about
Tibetan youths getting impatient with the Dalai Lama’s
policy of patience, forgiveness and non-violence to regain their homeland: “When
they are in Tibet, they long to come to India,” (talking about the newly
arrived boys from Tibet). “When they get to India, they dream of America.
But when they get to America, what will they dream of then?” (Unquote).
But
why should this question be addressed only to Tibetan youth?
What about the youth from
this country and so many other countries
who go
to America?
What do ‘they’ dream of? For that matter what do the
American youth dream of? Hazarding a guess the vast majority have
only one dream.
To make
enough money to savour the life of instant gratification and all
other forms of gratification that abundant riches bring. It is
the same dream that now
motivates the young people of China. How does this yearning, which
is almost a universal urge on a scale unknown to earlier generations,
reconcile itself
with spirituality or spiritualism? This is the question that needs
to be addressed.
When
the youth get restless and pass resolutions like “Now is the time
to act” the Dalai Lama tells the robed figures assembled before him (during
the consecration of a monastery), that their aim should be to ensure that the
monasteries they build are not just physical structures but sanctuaries within
themselves – so strong they can inspire the world. They listen with rapt
attention to His Holiness. They would be wondering how it would be possible
for them to make any dent in today’s hedonistic global society.
But then the Dalai Lama is in the tradition of the great line of
Rishis who bestrode
this land since ancient times. He knows that like all cycles of
great excesses, this too will climax in a destructive frenzy leading
to a spiritual re-awakening
without which the world might not be able to survive this time
round. So, with
his foresightedness and infinite patience he prepares his flock
and his followers around the world for the Satyug that must follow
the Kalyug in which the
world is presently steeped. Like the Vedic seers of yore and the
great Tibetan yogis
that went before him, he can see the present unfolding into the
future that will require humans of wisdom and compassion to redeem
humankind from the
existential slime in which it is wallowing. .
In
Nature all beings yearn for contentment. A happy or contented
person
is not likely
to get involved in unseemly affrays. An extract
from
Third Millennium
Equipoise reproduced below elaborates on the human condition thus: “In
the stages of man's evolution he first tried to understand his environment;
then he tried to live with it; and finally he attempted to overcome it. This
is the stage that we are in - dominance. Domination can be achieved by a gross
process (destruction) or by the subtle process (harnessing). The urge to dominate
disturbs the equilibrium and the ferment thus created releases tremendous bursts
of energy in the form of physical forces (gross process) and mental forces
which on the higher plane become a subtle and on the lower plane a gross process.
In the intellectual sphere the struggle between the gross and fine determines
the path that will be followed by mankind. In the fine state, as it applies
to an individual, the appeasement of the basic urges does not, in itself, lead
to contentment”. (Unquote).
In
the language of the Waraos, the ancestral aborigines of the
Orinoco Delta
in Venezuela,
the word did exist as such, in the
expression
Oriwaka, which
for the Waraos has the following meanings: “wait together”, “have
a party”, “joy of sharing with others”, “paradise where
the dead are happy”, meanings that highlight the importance of sharing,
of joy, and of the transcendent as the key to happiness. In the Piaroa language
(of a Venezuelan Amazonian ethnic group) “happiness” is called
eseusa and means, principally “the joy of sharing with others”,
in value quite similar to the Warao concept. To the ancient Achaguas Arawak,
who also inhabited. Venezuela, their word chunikai meant both “happiness” and “health.
To the Baris, in western Venezuela, when their creator Sabaseba gave life to
them it was with the following mandate: “You will be called Bari and
will always be happy and smiling” and that is why their oral tradition
holds that “the Baris are thus not allowed to get angry, because happy
we were made by Sabaseba, as our elders have said. Because so all Baris have
been from the beginning and so we shall continue to be”.
Insofar
as the Mayas are concerned, it is interesting to note the
importance given to
happiness in the behaviour prescribed by their
moral code
known as the Pixab: “A thing is good as long as it harms no one. A thing is right
as long as it contributes to happiness and life” (Ajpupt Oxlajuj, “Fuentes
y Fundamentos de Derecho da la Nacion Maya-Quiche”, Editorial
Serviprensa, Guatenmala, 2001, emphasis mind).
In
the Maya language Q’eqchi, happiness is called sahil ch’oolejil
and means literally “having a glad heart”. Confirming the great
centrality that the value of happiness had in daily Q’eqchi Maya life,
the main social greeting is,’ which means: “How is
your heart?”
Or
take the following comparison by Chief Maquinna, of the Nootka
nation, also in North America,
after having learned the banking
practices brought
by white
civilization: “We Indians have no such bank; but when we
have plenty of money and blankets, we give them away to other chiefs
and people, and
by and by they return them, with interest, and our hearts feel
good. Our way of
giving is our bank”
This brings us to the centrality
of the shifting spiritual paradigm. Unless the world turns
its back on the existing capitalist paradigm,
which propels
the world towards the multiplication of wants and instant gratification
of desires and moves in the direction of the Gandhian paradigm
of simple living,
humankind will inevitably, nay inexorably, be drawn toward self-annihilation
and planetary destruction. Spirituality as understood since the
dawn of history cannot find root in such an environment. Except
for isolated
pockets,
it could
disappear from the Earth by the end of the century.
We
have forgotten that spirituality derives from simplicity
and a
sense of wonder.
Drawing an analogy from the simpler animal world
someone
said: “The
bird does not sing because it is happy, it’s happy because
it sings.”
CONCLUDING REMARKS
In
concluding one has to decide whether India still possesses
in good measure
that special
essence of spirituality, which
it must
continue
to espouse
for itself and the world. In the context of increasing
globalisation this aspect assumes overwhelming urgency. Should
India cease to be itself and become like all other
nations, the
world might not be able to retrace its steps from the brink. On
the other hand
if the country were to preserve its unique character it can play
the role for
which the ancient seers and its heritage had been inexorably preparing
it, in humankind’s darkest hour in the face of the coming
apocalypse. According to Anandmurti Gurumaa the core point of every
religion is to discover the
peace within and when you are brimming with the radiance of peace
then spread it
around, share it with everybody.
The book Dealing with Global
Terrorism: The Way Forward ends with Rabindranath Tagore's
poem: After 7/7 in the midst of the cacophony
of religious
pronouncements from all quarters nothing could cut through the
obscurantism of driven
orthodoxy more clinically, cleanly and irrefutably than the Nobel
laureates expression:
"Religion,
like poetry, is not a mere idea, it is expression.
The self-expression of God is in the endless variety of
creation; and our attitude toward the
Infinite Being must also in its expression
have a variety of individuality, ceaseless and unending.
Those sects which jealously build their
boundaries with too rigid creeds excluding all spontaneous
movement of the living spirit may
hoard
their theology but they kill religion". (Emphasis
not in the original).
|