|
Various forms of violence are striking terror in society, increasing bitterness is one of the results. A solution to the problem pervading the whole
society was enunciated by Anuvrat Anushastra Tulsi: A solution that simply does not create new problems.
Let us examine the two terms 'human being' and 'relation' in the above context. First, it is necessary to understand the meaning of 'human being'.
- Many branches of knowledge including sociology, psychology and philosophy have differentiated the term and tried to understand man to be basically
a social being.
- Psychologists have explained man and his behaviour on the basis of his unconsciousness and basic instincts.
- Philosophers have made karma the basis of their interpretation.
- Spiritual teachers have defined man on the basis of intellectual awareness.
- Aristotle defined man as a rational animal. This kind of ability to reason is not found in any other being.
I feel that though none of these interpretations is wrong, none is entirely right either. With a partial or one-sided view point, no single view or
opinion is either fully right or wrong.
Human Being:
Individuality / Communality
It is true that man is a social living being but it is not true that he is social and nothing else. He is as much individual as he is social.
Existentialist philosophers lay emphasis on his individual features, not on common or universal features. In their opinion, individuality is man's
exclusive quality and he cannot be understood by underplaying it. Sociologists hold the view that man cannot survive without water. Here we have two diverse views, premium on individuality by existentialist and that
on communality by sociologists. It is only by combining both that we get total view.
The Psychological View
Psychologists say that man is governed by the unconscious, as all his activities and behaviour are conducted by it. This again is a partial truth.
There is much behind the unconscious which acts as much as conductor as our wakeful awareness. The soul which is beyond the unconscious has its own importance, as well as our wakefulness awareness or the conscious
has something unique about it.
We can thus treat the unconscious as a midpoint with the soul at its back and intelligent awareness in its fore. Between the two ends operates the
unconscious.
Relations
Society And Relations
Let us now consider the nature of relations. Society is a chain of relations. Relation means social orientation or orientation towards society is
relation-oriented, i.e. characterised by relations. These relations start with the very birth of a child. It gets related to parents, brothers, sisters, etc. One who is beyond relations is a Sanyasi or Mumukshu (an ascetic who renounced the world or one who is desirous of salvation). The first characteristic of a Muni according to the Uttaradhyanan Sutra is freedom from relation. But on the worldly plane, the child is surrounded by relations right from its birth.
The Philosophical Context
Three streams emerged in Indian philosophy:
The first Shankaracharya and his guru Gaurhpal gave birth to Advaitavad. According to this doctrine, God or the Eternal spirit is real, the world is unreal, an illusion.
By conceding Advaita, one wonders how we can function in daily practical life.
What will be the relation between the society and individual? Advait would rule out all behaviour, language, ideas and thinking. So the believers in
Advait had to put forward the concept of Maya, mere appearance or illusion. Whatever is going on is unreal. Thus conceding the inanimate installed Maya on the royal pedestal. This is
idealistic thinking.
The schools of Buddhism, Samkhya and Nyaya are supporters of the doctrine of Dvaitavad. According to them, both the animate and inanimate exist.
For the realists, positing the concept of Maya is essential. Both the animate and the inanimate are real. But here too there is a problem. By conceding
Dvait we lend weight to the notion of difference. Therefore, it is essential for us to concede Advait at the back of Dvaita and Dvaita at the back of Advaita..
- Dvaitadvaitavad (Dualism and Monism)
Co-Ordination Between Advaita And Dvait
The philosophy of anekant subscribes neither to Dvaita nor to Advaita, it co-ordinates the two. We cannot explain relations purely on the basis of
Advaita alone. We have to resort to both in order to explain relations. An exclusive allegiance to Dvaita will mean perpetual bitterness in relation as a result of accentuating difference and distance. It will be
impossible to remove that bitterness. In fact Advaita is inherent in Dvaita. It is on the basis of Advaita tradition that one treats everyone else like oneself, that self realisation takes place and one observes
equanimity in both joy and sorrow. But Advaita alone is not adequate and one has to resort to Dvaita. If the 'other ' is there, Dvaita will have to be explained and human nature and behaviour will have to be
understood on that basis.
I And My
Let us discuss the ways of improving relations on the basis of both Advaita and Dvaita.
It is the basic instincts which are responsible for relations. Two of our basic instincts are 'I' and 'My'. ‘I’ represents selfishness and ‘My’
represents relation.
All relations are based on the basic instinct of possession. As the instinct of possession extend in scope, the relations multiply. There would have
been no relations in the absence of that instinct. An extension of that instinct is an extension of relations.
But if there had been no 'I' there would have been no problem in relations. The problems we face in respect of relations have 'I' at their back,
because the 'I' instinct breeds increasing selfishness.
The 'My' instinct gets divided into many categories. If it is my son or my family, they can be partners in the profits I earn. But my servant cannot
share in the profits.
Again, the factor influencing such a categorisation of relations is the 'I' instinct. Once 'I' ceases to be narrow and confined and spreads out to
others, all problems pertaining to relations come to an end. 'I' in its narrow form breeds bitterness in relations resulting in complicated problems.
Causes Of Violence
Violence and crime are two major problems we face today. Violence has a myriad forms. One major factor behind violence is the individual tendency to
grab more and more, denying others their share.
The latter react with violence which sometimes assumes the shape of terrorism. Even as one man is busy earning, he wants to earn at the cost of others.
This exploitation is an important cause of violence. If we analyse the phenomena of thefts, robberies, kidnappings and murders, we find that one man's instinct is encouraging the instinct of other persons.
Greed and selfishness as individual instincts give birth to savage cruelty. In fact, one man's cruelty shifts to the victim and makes him cruel too.
Many of these problems would not have appeared if there had been no greed in man. Man has not grasped the true import of the instinct of
'I' and 'My'. In fact, he has fed them to such an extent that they have made all other instincts secondary.
Material Objects And Peace Are Not The Same
Let us elaborate the above proposition, for it is essential if people want to lead a happy
and peaceful life. Society has come into being so that man may live in peace, and be free from all worry and anxiety. There can be no happiness in the absence of peace. One can pile up items of comfort, but not of peace and happiness. We should never forget the fact that material objects and peace are not the same. Material objects and happiness are not the same. We should also remember the fact that problems and unhappiness are not the same. A problem may occur at the physical level or mental level. However, intellectual awareness transcends these levels. If we cling to a problem, there can be no solution.
If we are generally improving human relations we should refine the instincts 'I' and 'My' so that selfishness is not forfeited and the freedom of
others is not transgressed.
If someone is mine, it does not mean that he or she has no independent existence. Every living being has a right to live in freedom. A relation is
justified only to the extent it is useful without trampling on someone's freedom.
Life's Relativeness
Our life is relative. Life cannot be led in isolation. Everyone requires someone else. For sustaining one life the labour of a thousand of people is
needed. The labour of a large number of people is involved between the time a seed is planted and its product is cooked in the kitchen. It is only thereafter that someone eats a meal.
Being so much relative - related to others, it will be the height of ignorance on the part of a man not to closely deliberate upon relations and to
make them cordial.
To consider the problems with those related with our life amounts to considering the problems of relation, adopting an attitude of sensitiveness and
compassion towards others, making relations cordial and refining them.
World Created By Resoluteness
It is very difficult to know how to improve relations or how to make them cordial. The difficulty is caused by the persistent presence of the
uncontrolled ego: Selfishness will grow strong and will prevent cordial relations.
This would be like sea-water which cannot be made sweet even by mixing sugar in it.
Religious teachers have discovered the ways of curbing the ego. Anuvrat has given a philosophy for this purpose. The first step is to resolve or to
take a vow, which symbolises great strength. With the awakening of a resolve, the process of transformation commences. Our world is born of resolves or vows. It takes shape according to the resolve we make.
It is a major resolve that ‘I will not kill anyone deliberately or will not practice inessential violence’. A little violence now and then may be
essential for survival, but if the resolve to commit violence is given up and the resolve to practice non-violence is made, a strong base for making relations cordial is built.
The Principle Of Equipoise
Lord Mahavira gave a principle for rousing self awareness: Weigh all living beings with your pair of scales. Vyasa gave a similar principle: We should not do to others what we consider bad for ourselves. By practising these principles we generate compassion. If pain is unfavourable to us, it is equally unfavourable for others. Robbing others of their bread is bad, because I do not like my bread to be robbed. By balancing the two scales we refine our disposition and the ego is curbed. If I had been alone in the world, the world would have been mine-- my ego would have been expanded. But the world is peopled by countless others like me-- this thought puts an curb on my ego, limits it within well-defined confines.
The Issue Is Refinement
Using ‘Contemplation of Compassion’ is extremely important to awaken the intellectual awareness of compassion and sensitivity. Practice is essential for bringing about an internal change to our individuality.
By being merely social and opportunistic, we should not devalue its importance.
Socialisation cannot be useful beyond a point of refinement, though it does prove useful when it comes to building an organisation or system.
Practice is a long term process; one cannot expect transformation in a short time. Changing an attitude and developing another does not take a long
time. Maharishi Patanjali has rightly exhorted, changing of acquired or inherited traits has to be practised uninterruptedly over a long period with deep faith. Following such practice we can succeed in removing the
disposition of cruelty and restoring the disposition of compassion.
Practising Equality Of Distribution
One of Schumaker's books is entitled 'Small is Beautiful'. It can guide us in the right direction. Again, a Scottish company experimented with
distributive justice and it yielded positive results. Cruelty in society is likely to decrease if the principles of distributive justice and worker participation in management are practised.
Does it not encourage violence when a man earns huge profits and squanders millions just on an ordinary celebration? Does it not generate a strong
reaction? Human relations can certainly be improved if the principle of distributive justice is practised in society.
Who Will Provide Protection?
It is likely to understand properly that transformation may come about if we adopt and practice social change and spiritual experiments. We should be
aware of the consequences of increasing violence: Millions are spent on providing security to a single individual. Frightening to imagine that individuals throughout the country may need commandos for personal
security. Who will remain secure and who will provide security to others then?
Such a vicious circle can only be imagined. If serious thought is not given to this problem and appropriate and timely measures are not taken, no one
should be surprised to see the law of the jungle prevail in society, where large scale of mutual killings will become the order of the day. To avoid such a frightening eventuality, we should act wisely and learn to
eschew disproportionate and unjust consumption, denying others their share and as a result making them frustrated a lot.
The Solution
Bearing all this in mind, one can come to the conclusion that the solution lies in adopting the principles of Anuvrat and following the exercises of
Preksha Dhyan.
What can cause a bigger surprise than the fact that in this scientific age, intellectually aware and intelligent people are unable to transform
themselves or even to think of its need, while daily new inventions are being made and radical changes are taking place unabated. It is therefore imperative that steps are taken with a view to ensuring a bright
future for humanity and a life led with sublime human qualities.
One prior condition of such a consummation is an equal and simultaneous emphasis on a change of social order and refinement of attitudes. It is
possible through reflection, firm resolution and persistent practice. Let us therefore move forward in that direction.
top
|
