ANASAKTHI YOGA
The Bhagavat Gita, or the Lord’s Song, is one of the most important
portions of the Hindu scriptures. The most outstanding and unique precept that the Gita advocates is what is popularly known as “Anasakthi Yoga” or “Nishkama Karma”. This tenet, which perhaps, does not find place in any of the other major religions of the world, was revealed by the Lord, to Arjuna, on the battle field of Kurukshetra, to impart to him the philosophy of unattached action
The popular version of this doctrine, as understood by the common man, is that, what the Lord has prescribed in his immortal song, is that one should perform one’s allotted duties, without EXPECTATION of any result thereof.
This is a concept which appears to militate, prima facie, against the commonly adopted method wherein we perform actions, big or small, only with a specific end in view, and all our efforts, during the execution of such action, are directed towards the achievement of that objective. In fact, this system of working is so deeply ingrained in us, that we cannot conceive for a moment, the performance of any action without expectation of an appropriate result. To give an example, when one performs the action of eating one expects one’s hunger to be sated. When we board a train or a plane, we expect to reach a specific destination. Such examples can be multiplied ad infinitum.
What could the Lord have meant then, when He advised Arjuna on the battlefield to practice the doctrine of anasakthi yoga? The following is an attempt to elucidate this dilemma, by an explanation that is more meaningful, and more in line with our day to day activities, while taking care at the same time to see that one does not stray, from the essential import of the Lord’s teaching.
The word asakthi, forming part of the word anasakthi, or the word kama, which forms part of the word, nishkama karma, perhaps refers to ATTACHMENT to the results of action and not so much to the EXPECTATION of the results of action. If this is found acceptable, then the dichotomy we faced earlier will cease to exist.
In the light of this new understanding of the above doctrine, one begins to appreciate that what the Lord meant was that, not only can one perform one’s actions with the expectation of a specific and appropriate result, but one should also exert oneself to the limit of ones’ capacity to achieve that result. Anything less, will detract from one’s sincerity and devotion to the duty allotted to one by the inexorable law of Karma. The Lord has said, that, one has only a right to perform an action, but the giver of the result is the Lord Himself. (Karmnyeva adhikarasthe, ma phaleshu kadachana). So what one is exhorted to do, is to perform the action with total devotion to the expected result, but without attachment to it and be prepared, at the same time, for any outcome of the action, whether it is what one expected or the opposite. All sorrow and disappointment in life has its root cause in our attempting to make a comparison of the expected and achieved results of one’s action. In fact it will not be incorrect to say that the greater the disparity between the expected and the achieved results, the greater is one’s sorrow. And the greatest joy is experienced when there is total congruence between the expected and achieved results. The conclusion is that when the achieved result does not correlate to the expected result, one should stop making comparisons, and learn to accept the achieved result, with gratitude and humility, as a gift, that has been sanctified by the touch of the Lord’s feet. If this precept can be practiced, then all sorrow will cease instantly and one will be able to say with true conviction that “GOD IS IN HIS HEAVEN AND ALL IS WELL WITH WORLD”
Saturday, December 15, 2007
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
CONQUEST OF HATRED
CONQUEST OF HATRED
Perhaps the most debilitating and corrosive thought, that the human mind can harbor, is hatred, and every religion and every preacher, from the beginning of recorded history, has argued against this feeling and has emphasized the need for its total annihilation, to ensure the restoration of mental peace and tranquility. But the argument put forth by them, invariably is that the feeling of hatred is basically wrong and should therefore be avoided, like any other sin. However the feeling of hatred is so all pervading and universal, that a mere injunction to avoid it, simply, because it is a sin, may not be enough, to enable a person to eschew it totally, though he may be fully convinced, intellectually about the correctness of the stand. Therefore a more appealing and persuasive argument would appear to be necessary, if this objective, is to be effectively achieved.
It is in this context that the following thoughts occur to me as worthy of serious consideration.
It will be readily conceded by everyone, that the most important and precious thing in one’s life, is one’s own happiness and every action that one performs and every thought that one harbors, is directed, overtly or covertly, to the sole end of adding to, or enhancing this happiness. I can hear the howls of protest that this statement provokes. I can hear the vociferous objection from many of you, to the effect that this statement, taken at its face value, would make the entire human race, appear to be a very self centered and egoistic lot. I can hear you saying, that there are innumerable, great souls, preachers, and men of status, who perform acts of charity, day in and day out, without any selfish motive, whatsoever. I certainly concede that these benevolent acts are being performed, without expectation of any material return. I am only asserting that these actions are being performed, because, the performers believe that they are essentially good acts, whose execution, will give them a sense of satisfaction, which will ultimately, add to their inner happiness. No one in his right senses would perform any act of benevolence, solely, with the intention of making oneself feel miserable.
Even an act, such as fasting, or other forms of self-inflicted pain undertaken by a devotee, as a religious duty, or for that matter, even any physical suffering of a masochist, has the ultimate motive of only adding to his individual happiness.
The acceptability or otherwise of any thought or action should therefore be assessed solely against the yardstick of its capacity to add to one’s sense of happiness. Judged by this standard, all thoughts of hatred, fail miserably to make the grade, as will be clear from the following exposition.
Hatred is a mental process, and like any other mental process, it can sustain itself and find its fulfillment, only if and when it translates itself into an appropriate form of physical action. For example, the love one feels for a little child, which is basically a mental process, finds fulfillment, only when it is followed up by an appropriate physical action, such as patting the child on the head, or perhaps planting a kiss on its cheek. When the mental process is prevented from finding its fulfillment in a corresponding physical action, it invariably leads to frustration and despondency, which will detract from ones sense of happiness.
Now let us see how this dictum works out in the case of a feeling of hatred. When we hate a person, it begins initially, as a thought in the mind, which will start to clamor for physical expression to fulfill itself. The appropriate physical action in such a case will be to bring about some harm to the person hated, physically, mentally or by any other means. Now, causing such harm to the person hated, may, most often not be within the capacity of the hater to bring about. This lack of fulfillment, due to one’s inherent limitations, will lead to frustration and despair on the part of the hater and this, will undermine his happiness and make him feel miserable. It will therefore be clear that by hating a person, the actual sufferer is the hater himself, and the person hated may not even be aware of the hatred and he will therefore suffer no ill consequences because of it.
The bottom line, therefore, is that hatred, which takes birth, as a mental process, and which, because of its inherent inability to find fulfillment in an appropriate physical action, will undermine the peace and tranquility of the hater and lead to his becoming increasingly disillusioned and unhappy. Therefore the feeling of hatred is to be totally eschewed, not merely because it is a sin, but because it destroys one’s own peace of mind and happiness.
All that has been stated above will apply ipso facto to the other cardinal sin of jealousy also.
Perhaps the most debilitating and corrosive thought, that the human mind can harbor, is hatred, and every religion and every preacher, from the beginning of recorded history, has argued against this feeling and has emphasized the need for its total annihilation, to ensure the restoration of mental peace and tranquility. But the argument put forth by them, invariably is that the feeling of hatred is basically wrong and should therefore be avoided, like any other sin. However the feeling of hatred is so all pervading and universal, that a mere injunction to avoid it, simply, because it is a sin, may not be enough, to enable a person to eschew it totally, though he may be fully convinced, intellectually about the correctness of the stand. Therefore a more appealing and persuasive argument would appear to be necessary, if this objective, is to be effectively achieved.
It is in this context that the following thoughts occur to me as worthy of serious consideration.
It will be readily conceded by everyone, that the most important and precious thing in one’s life, is one’s own happiness and every action that one performs and every thought that one harbors, is directed, overtly or covertly, to the sole end of adding to, or enhancing this happiness. I can hear the howls of protest that this statement provokes. I can hear the vociferous objection from many of you, to the effect that this statement, taken at its face value, would make the entire human race, appear to be a very self centered and egoistic lot. I can hear you saying, that there are innumerable, great souls, preachers, and men of status, who perform acts of charity, day in and day out, without any selfish motive, whatsoever. I certainly concede that these benevolent acts are being performed, without expectation of any material return. I am only asserting that these actions are being performed, because, the performers believe that they are essentially good acts, whose execution, will give them a sense of satisfaction, which will ultimately, add to their inner happiness. No one in his right senses would perform any act of benevolence, solely, with the intention of making oneself feel miserable.
Even an act, such as fasting, or other forms of self-inflicted pain undertaken by a devotee, as a religious duty, or for that matter, even any physical suffering of a masochist, has the ultimate motive of only adding to his individual happiness.
The acceptability or otherwise of any thought or action should therefore be assessed solely against the yardstick of its capacity to add to one’s sense of happiness. Judged by this standard, all thoughts of hatred, fail miserably to make the grade, as will be clear from the following exposition.
Hatred is a mental process, and like any other mental process, it can sustain itself and find its fulfillment, only if and when it translates itself into an appropriate form of physical action. For example, the love one feels for a little child, which is basically a mental process, finds fulfillment, only when it is followed up by an appropriate physical action, such as patting the child on the head, or perhaps planting a kiss on its cheek. When the mental process is prevented from finding its fulfillment in a corresponding physical action, it invariably leads to frustration and despondency, which will detract from ones sense of happiness.
Now let us see how this dictum works out in the case of a feeling of hatred. When we hate a person, it begins initially, as a thought in the mind, which will start to clamor for physical expression to fulfill itself. The appropriate physical action in such a case will be to bring about some harm to the person hated, physically, mentally or by any other means. Now, causing such harm to the person hated, may, most often not be within the capacity of the hater to bring about. This lack of fulfillment, due to one’s inherent limitations, will lead to frustration and despair on the part of the hater and this, will undermine his happiness and make him feel miserable. It will therefore be clear that by hating a person, the actual sufferer is the hater himself, and the person hated may not even be aware of the hatred and he will therefore suffer no ill consequences because of it.
The bottom line, therefore, is that hatred, which takes birth, as a mental process, and which, because of its inherent inability to find fulfillment in an appropriate physical action, will undermine the peace and tranquility of the hater and lead to his becoming increasingly disillusioned and unhappy. Therefore the feeling of hatred is to be totally eschewed, not merely because it is a sin, but because it destroys one’s own peace of mind and happiness.
All that has been stated above will apply ipso facto to the other cardinal sin of jealousy also.
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
The Gift of acceptance
THE GIFT OF ACCEPTANCE
Perhaps one of the greatest signs of a true believer in God, is his capacity to accept, all that happens in his life, as true gifts of God, no matter whether they appear to his limited understanding, to be good or bad. This philosophy of acceptance, is based primarily on the undermentioned, criteria that form the basis of the foundation on which the true believer’s faith is built.
1. There is a God, who is the Creator of the universe and all that it contains, and this God is omnipotent, omniscient,omnipresent, and merciful.
2. Nothing can happen in this world without His permission.
3. Nothing that happens with the permission of an allknowing and merciful God can be bad.
When an event occurs in one’s life, which one can perceive with his limited understanding to be “beneficial” to oneself, there is no difficulty in accepting it as a true gift from God, though even in such cases, blinded by one’s own sense of ego, one is likely to apportion a good share of the credit for such
“beneficial” happening to one’s own smartness and forethought.
The real conflict of understanding begins, only when something happens to one, that one considers as bad. Such a happening could perhaps be, a loss of a dear one, or the loss of one’s material possessions or any one of a number of events that would normally cause distress of mind and desolation. It is at such times that one asks oneself, “How could such a distressful event take place under the sanction of a just and merciful God?” In fact, no less a person that Vivekananda, in his preenlightenment days, had said, when he was facing the agony of his father’s passing away, that if he had the powers of God he would certainly have created a much better world, where such painful events would not take place at all. Unlike in the case of the “beneficial” happening, one has no hesitation, in the case of a distressful happening, to place the entire responsibility, for the event at God’s doors.
This sense of frustration and distress, at the occurrence of a perceivedly “bad” happening will cease to exist, if one has unshakeable faith in the third tenet, mentioned above, and if one is able to see in its light, this socalled “bad” happening, also as a gift of God, in the same way in which one evaluated the “good” happening, earlier. This capacity to accept with uncomplaining reverence, any gift from God, whether it appears to us as good, bad or indifferent, is innately present in every believer. This will be clear, if one considers one’s readiness to accept any “prasad” that is offered in any place of worship, without questioning for a moment, the purity of the ingredients that went into its making, or the state of cleanliness of the person, who hands over the “prasad” to us. This ready and respectful acceptance of the “prasad”, is not because of any intrinsic merit in the “prasad”, but only because, one believes that it is a gift from God, which has been sanctified by the touch of His feet.
If one is able to truly and fully bring to bear the same attitude, when reacting to a so called “bad” happening in one’s life, and if one is able to see it also, as an event, that has been sanctified by the touch of God’s feet, then one will be able, to accept even, the socalled “bad” events in one’s life, not merely with resignation, but with gratitude and humility.
Perhaps one of the greatest signs of a true believer in God, is his capacity to accept, all that happens in his life, as true gifts of God, no matter whether they appear to his limited understanding, to be good or bad. This philosophy of acceptance, is based primarily on the undermentioned, criteria that form the basis of the foundation on which the true believer’s faith is built.
1. There is a God, who is the Creator of the universe and all that it contains, and this God is omnipotent, omniscient,omnipresent, and merciful.
2. Nothing can happen in this world without His permission.
3. Nothing that happens with the permission of an allknowing and merciful God can be bad.
When an event occurs in one’s life, which one can perceive with his limited understanding to be “beneficial” to oneself, there is no difficulty in accepting it as a true gift from God, though even in such cases, blinded by one’s own sense of ego, one is likely to apportion a good share of the credit for such
“beneficial” happening to one’s own smartness and forethought.
The real conflict of understanding begins, only when something happens to one, that one considers as bad. Such a happening could perhaps be, a loss of a dear one, or the loss of one’s material possessions or any one of a number of events that would normally cause distress of mind and desolation. It is at such times that one asks oneself, “How could such a distressful event take place under the sanction of a just and merciful God?” In fact, no less a person that Vivekananda, in his preenlightenment days, had said, when he was facing the agony of his father’s passing away, that if he had the powers of God he would certainly have created a much better world, where such painful events would not take place at all. Unlike in the case of the “beneficial” happening, one has no hesitation, in the case of a distressful happening, to place the entire responsibility, for the event at God’s doors.
This sense of frustration and distress, at the occurrence of a perceivedly “bad” happening will cease to exist, if one has unshakeable faith in the third tenet, mentioned above, and if one is able to see in its light, this socalled “bad” happening, also as a gift of God, in the same way in which one evaluated the “good” happening, earlier. This capacity to accept with uncomplaining reverence, any gift from God, whether it appears to us as good, bad or indifferent, is innately present in every believer. This will be clear, if one considers one’s readiness to accept any “prasad” that is offered in any place of worship, without questioning for a moment, the purity of the ingredients that went into its making, or the state of cleanliness of the person, who hands over the “prasad” to us. This ready and respectful acceptance of the “prasad”, is not because of any intrinsic merit in the “prasad”, but only because, one believes that it is a gift from God, which has been sanctified by the touch of His feet.
If one is able to truly and fully bring to bear the same attitude, when reacting to a so called “bad” happening in one’s life, and if one is able to see it also, as an event, that has been sanctified by the touch of God’s feet, then one will be able, to accept even, the socalled “bad” events in one’s life, not merely with resignation, but with gratitude and humility.
Thursday, July 5, 2007
Some random thoughts
Looking back at one's life objectively, at a stage of life, when one is conscious of the fact that, in life's journey, one is much nearer the end than the beginning, one wonders what a significant role, destiny has played in one's life. One sees the desperate plans one has formulated from time to time, how one was elated when some of these plans culminated in success and how one became depressed when on quite a few occasions the contrary happened. But looking back at the entire scenario, one becomes convinced that no matter whether one's plans met with success or failure, the guiding hand of a benevolent and impartial Providence, right through the course of one's existance is clearly and unquestionably evident. One can therefore only sit back and say that God is in His heaven all is well with the world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)