Moved

Moved here - http://estheppan.wordpress.com

Gandhian Ahimsa

Ahimsa is to not initiate violent act with selfish intent.

Like all other good qualities, ahimsa is the by-product of a life lived with spiritual purpose.

Materialistic purpose to life, exemplified by self-interest, self-gratification and self-aggrandizement, is what inevitably leads to himsa.

When ahimsa or other such qualities like Austerity or Tolerance etc., are attempted to be ‘adopted’ and ‘implemented’ into the life of a materialistically oriented person, they become mere tools for further self-aggrandizement and for public consumption.

Forcibly adopting ahimsa is actually himsa on oneself.

When a person subjects himself to be beaten up by another, in the belief that such act will cause the other to feel guilty and withdraw, this person does three wrong things.

One, he tolerates the intolerable. He tolerates adharma.

Second, he does himsa to himself, though he may mistakenly believe that he is upholding the spirit of ahimsa.
A person who allows violent act to be done to himself, is also a participant in himsa.

Third, he is doing so in anticipation of eventual fruit, which is to cause guilt on the other. This is against the spirit of nishkama karma, action without seeking fruits thereof.

All three points are against the message of the bhagavad gita, mahabharata, ramayana and the 'traditional indian culture' which exhorts people to uphold dharma, to live peaceful life in consonance with Nature and to actualise karma without seeking fruits thereof.

Gandhi's exhortion to accept indignities without demur is on the lines of "show the other cheek" phrase attributed to christ.
That he was comprehensively influenced by church and bible is evident upon reading his collected works(CWMG).

His public claims of following the bhagavad gita and Sri Rama are incongruent with his actual actions and exhortions.

Gandhi, on retrospection, turns out to be a product of those times, a result of missionary influenced education system that de-valued indian culture and values, which caused many such 'educated' people to be influenced by christian ideas and western propaganda. Such people, deracinated, were unable to appreciate indian culture, unable to understand spirituality, which is the main theme of indian culture.
Gandhi's 'brahmacharya', 'austerity' and his version of 'ahimsa' were the result of misguided attempts at borrowing from indian culture, something which westerners were actively doing at that time, and even now. Like all such attempts, gandhi's too failed to reflect the real worth of indian values and culture because they were taken out of their most important context of spirituality.

This is the reason Max Mueller's and such others' attempts to understand Vedas were failure. Just as a carnivores animal cannot digest grass, a person holding materialistic motives, which is what all western approaches are all about, cannot understand indian culture. Whatever they feed off it, remains undigested and is discarded, often with condemnation.

West-educated Gandhi and Nehru, among many others of their time were unable to understand their own culture, as are many others even now, because they abandoned its central theme of spirituality, which is not just to read the bhagavad gita and other texts or imitating spiritual greats, but orienting one's life purpose towards realisation of higher truths about oneself and creation. It was this that was central to indian culture. When taken away from this context, themes such as 'brahmacharya', 'ahimsa', austerity etc., become dogmatic pursuits towards self-aggrandizement and for public show.

Some people, under the influence of christian propaganda about christ 'dying for sins of mankind', attempt to achieve a halo around them by projecting an image of 'suffering' and austerity. They mistakenly believe that by following christ's action, as propagated by the church, of forgiving all sins of others while suffering themself, they will also be exalted. Self-aggrandizement is the motive behind this.

Some others, equally so influenced, yet unable to gather enough gumption to hurt themselves in search of such 'glory', consider the people who appear to be doing so with awe, almost christ like, for their acts of 'suffering' and 'forgiveness'.

Since british education was imposed upon india for two hundred years, it was natural that many people in early 20th century considered the 'acts' of Gandhi with awe and respect. Britishers, who naturally preferred peaceful agitators to violent ones, gladly propagated such 'gandhian values'.

Nehru, a similar product of his times, took after the british who tutored him, and appropriated the symbol of gandhi, and like the british, used it for political benefit. His succesors have merely followed his lead.

The result is for all to see.

When China does border intrusion, India finds virtue in 'ahimsa'.

When Pakistan sends armed merceneries to kill indian civilians, India seeks virtue in 'restraint' and 'talks'.

When Nepal, Bangladesh act against Indian national interest, India is silent spectator.

When America funds Pakistan who funds jihadis, India does not demur.
When Saudis fund madrassas, India is not concerned.
When Indian culture is being eroded by capitalist consumerism and communist activism, India calls it progress.
When missionaries, the maoists in their payroll and jihadis kill indians unprovoked, India is unmoved. It being 'gandhian value' for indians to suffer.
When indians express outrage at such acts and retaliate, it is vehemently condemned. That being not 'gandhian value'.
It appears, in India 'gandhian values' are meant for indians alone, not for followers of western constructs such as christianity, islam, consumerism, communism, secularism, even maoism.

Gandhi is rightfully called 'father of the nation'. That is actually an indictment considering the state of the nation and that of its citizens, many of who display inability to understand dharma let alone the need to uphold it, under the influence of western materialism.
This being the same land that nurtured the civilisation that realised the concept of dharma.
This is the tragedy of gandhi. And much of India today.





----This post was inspired by comments on Sastwingees blog---

People of India

People of India are of four types.

One- Those who call themselves explicitly non-Hindu, due to allegiance to certain ideology which could be any of the various forms of Islam/ Christianity/ Communism, exclusivist Buddhism/Jainism/Sikhism, extreme Atheism/Dravidianism, Zorastrianism or Judaism.



Two- Those who call themselves non-Hindu due to a feeling of shame induced by the prevalent notions enforced by west-owned media, marxist academicians and so-called intellectuals, of it being not modern/progressive, being too archaic, infested with caste, sati, child marriage, superstitions, fundamentalism, etc., and its philosophy having no relevance for future. Such people find it convenient to disown their background to find acceptance among their 'progressive' colleagues, to be seen as 'modern' and also to escape a feeling of guilt and confusion associated with all the allegations against Hinduism coupled with a lack of knowledge about india's ancient philosophy. These people on occasions parrot the lines of media and marxist academicians about the ills of indian society, as if to illustrate to others and to himself that he does not belong to that community anymore, that he is keeping up with the times and is progressive, liberal. These people may also nominally call themselves Agnostic, Atheist, Liberal or Secular, because they consider it fashionable. These people are generally products of those professional institutions where politics has not reached the virulent levels as JNU or DU, yet interested parties are very active beneath the surface pushing their agenda. They may aspire to work in MNCs abroad. So they are subconsciously conditioning themselves towards that. Many of these people later go on to become part of the first group while some join the third group.



Three- Those who call themselves Hindu. These are the majority of India today, but depleting, losing their members to the previously mentioned group under the influence of the prevalent 'secular' education system and media activism. They range from those who have deep knowledge of Sruti and Smritis, to those who mostly adhere to rituals, to those who are concerned about the political attacks against the indian way of life and also includes those who call themselves so merely because their parents did so.



Four- Those who sublimated personal identity. They live the lives of rishis. They experience the Vedas. While some of them live what may appear to be ordinary worldly life from outside, many live very close to nature. Their thoughts sustains spiritualty in this land and the world over.



People are dynamic. They keep changing their views. And many people shift from one group to another at different times. Such shifting is more prevalent between the second and third groups, sometimes from second to first group, rarely from first group to second. People of the fourth group, generally, do not shift.

Who are we ?

Part I

Traditionally indians considered four aims.

One, to experience spirituality.
To realise oneself.
A person involved in such pursuit was Brahmana.
Example – Adi Sankaracharya, Ramana Maharshi

Two, to uphold dharma, righteousness.
A person involved in such pursuit was Kshatriya.
Example – Sri Rama, Shivaji

Three, to create wealth. For family, community and country, to create wealth.
A person having such an aim was Vyshya.
Example- All those people who made sure that India’s share in world GDP was always greater than 25% till around 1750 when britishers started looting india.

Four, self- aggrandizement. To indulge oneself. ‘Enjoy’ life. Have fun. Work hard, party harder.
It boils down to ‘me’ and ‘mine’.
My life, my body, my looks, my wife, my children, my relations, my friends, my car, my bungalows, my achievements, my degrees, my name, my fame, my money, my empire, my needs, my philosophy, my philanthropy, my broad-mindedness, my Power, my God.
Center of the universe is me and what is mine. Everyting else assumes importance in relation with me.

So if the Dodo bird or the whales do not contribute in any way to my immediate needs, they might as well not exist. If the meat of chicken or goat gives sensual pleasure to me, their purpose is to satisfy my palate. If the Africans can be subjugated and made to slave for me, that is as per the divine dispensations of My God. If the Native Americans lived on bounteous land, they should give it all up for me. This is the mindset.

A person indulging in such aims was Sudra.
Example- All those indians who collaborated with britishers to administer (loot) india during brutish raj.

However Sudras were not like that originally. They helped the others and tried to emulate the really worthy.

As per traditions, a Brahmana is considered ideal for educating people, spreading knowledge.
A Kshatriya, for administering the society, upholding Dharma.
A Vyshya for business, producing things.
And Sudra for helping the others in benefiting society.

99.9999% of people today, most of the time, pursue selfish goals, Sudras gone bad. Perhaps the hallmark of KaliYuga.

Part II

Do ideas attract you ?
Search for the truth of Life and its purpose interest you ? The quest for the meaning of Life allure you ?

Then you think like a Brahmana.
Seek to realise Brahma, and impart knowledge to community, society, nation.

Do you think of events, actions, look forward to making things happen ?
Do principles attract you ?
Do you feel impelled to raise your voice against unrighteusness ?

Then you act like a Kshatriya.
Help administering the community, society, nation. Uphold Dharma, righteousness.

Do materials interest you ?
Gadgets engage you ? producing things attract you ? creating wealth make you happy ?

Then you may handle things like a Vyshya.
Go on, set up business. Increase the wealth of the community, society, nation.

Do you venerate personalities, identify with heroes, enamoured with film stars, adore cricketers, want to live their lifestyle ? Emulate people ? Seek approval from society ? Want to model yourself on another ? Want to possess things ?

Then you seek to 'experience' life, emotions, feelings, taking cue from others, like a Sudra.

Try to accept as heroes only persons of true worth, not mere pomp and show. Choose those who have realised Brahma, those who upholds Dharma, those who creates wealth for society.
And help them in serving your community, society, nation.

And most importantly, remember that one's likes are changeable. Every person is a dynamic being.
As you feel drawn to new likes, go on, accept them as your aim and actualise Karma.