Karna: The Tragic Hero

A child who was found floating on the water grows up to become a king.  Karna was the son of Kunti from the Sun God.  Kunti was still very young when she had occasion to serve Rishi (Sage) Durvasa.  She served him with great dedication.  Sage granted Kunti  Mantras (Chant) and the God she would think of after reciting the Mantra, would appear before her and bless her with a son endowed with his own godly qualities.   Out of curiosity Kunti  chanted Surya (Sun) mantra.  The Ordained happened.  Sun God appeared before Kunti in his resplendent glory. This is the story of the birth of Karna.

Karna’s foster parents Radha and Athiratha, so called low born people, loved Karna immensely.  Society may not be fair but the existence is fair.  Karna was always unhappy because he could not come to terms with what he was being labelled as, low born.  He was referred as suta or low born everywhere.  All the time he nourished his bitterness.  Life doesnot workout according to our wish.  Karna’s bitterness made a wonderful human being that Karna was, into such a nasty character in the Mahabharata.  At this juncture Duryodana made Karna the king of Angada Province.  Karna was beholden to Duryodana for this and showed the loyalty to Duryodana till the end.

Karna’s life was alternately tragedy and sacrifices.  Throughout his life he was known for the quality of sacrifice.  He would not say no to anybody who comes to him for a gift.    Ultimately he was destroyed by this quality of sacrifice.  When Krishna told the truth Karna broke down, yet he stayed with Duryodana for  loyalty.  Though there was no hatred in his heart he believed that he was to hate Pandavas because of loyalty to Duryodana.  Duryodana used Karna as a counterweight to Arjuna.  Before the Mahabharata battle Lord Indra, the  god of rain, fearing that his Son Arjuna would be defeated by Karna, disguised as an old Brahmin pleaded with Karna for his Kavacha and kundal in donation.  Though Karna was cautioned by Sun God about this Karna could not refuse Lord Indra.  He was such a large hearted person,  he gave his Kavacha and Kundal to Lord Indra who was in disguise as an old Brahmin.   Kavacha and Kundal made Karna Invincible, yet Karna parted with them.

In the battle of Kurukshethra, when Karna was face to face with Arjuna, he forgot Bramhastra Mantra (Chant) because of the curse by his teacher for not disclosing his Kula.   To Karn’s misfortune, wheels of his chariot sunk in the soft earth and he was immobile.  When Karna was trying to put the wheel right, using this opportunity Arjuna killed him.  Karna was the greatest warrior yet he was killed in the battle using strategies.

Mahabharata would have been a different story if Karna was not such a …………

DANAVEER.

Battleground in the Mind

War fought in the mind is far more effective than the war fought on the battle ground.  Without spilling the blood the enemy is defeated in the war fought in the mind.  Gautama, before he became Buddha fought a ferocious battle in the mind against the enemy that was more powerful than any soldier on the battle ground.  Maara was Gautama’s enemy.  In fact, Maara is the enemy of all those who are on the righteous path.  Maara in the Buddhist’s tradition can be understood as Saitan. 

Maara, a non-form entity, has the army under his command such as sensual desire, hunger and cravings to name a few.We all allow Maara – thoughts and desires to colour our mood and control us.  By experience we know emotions are ephemeral, yet we still identify with them. 

When Gautama renounced the world and the passed through the city gates, Maara appeared before him and tempted him.  Gautama however did not pay any attention to him.  Gautama was sitting under the Bodhi Tree with a firm resolve to become the Buddha.  Maara summoned all his forces to attack Gautama.  The Devas (Purest thoughts) who were sitting around Gautama fled at the sight of Maara.  But Gautama’s strong (firmed) mind defeated Maara’s army and Maara himself had to plea. 

Before Maara fled he hurled his last weapon.  He tried to dissuade Gautama by claiming the seat Gautama was sitting as his own.  All Maara’s followers testified in favour of Maara.  Gautama asked the earth to speak for him by touching the ground with his middle figure.  The earth then roared in response and bore the testimony for Gautama.  Thus Gautama defeated Maara.  Devas celebrated the victory.

The Buddha was of course aware of desires but realised they were temporary appearances.  So, noticed a thought as soon as they arise and Remember……

There always stands Maara.

Paramahamsa: Sri Ramakrishna

Hamsa(swan) is a special creature in this universe with an extraordinary power that is not found in any other creatures. It has the capability to separate water from milk when they are mixed. This power makes Hamsa into a Paramahamsa (super swan). This is ‘Hamsa Ksheera Nyaya’(swan’s justice of milk).  Hamsa is equally at home on water or on land. In Hindu scriptures, Hamsa is the vehicle of ‘Brahma’ (creator).  Thinking mind has chosen ‘Paramahamsa’ for a title to honour the persons who have attained enlightenment.  Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa was such an enlightened man, an Indian mystic Yogi in the 19^th Century.  Sri Ramakrishna possessed a spiritual ecstasies from the young age and was influenced by several religious traditions. He was a devotee of Goddess mother ‘Kali’.  He was not a scholar not even educated by usual standards but his profound understanding of the human Life and its purpose is amazing.  One whose body and mind are deluged by devotion and love of god, he indeed is the one in whom God has incarnated in human body.  Sri Ramakrishna was an incarnation of Lord Rama and Krishna. 

One needs special eyes and ears to understand that Sri Ramakrishna was an incarnation of both Lord Rama and Krishna.  Dive deep in the ocean of Sri Rama Krishna Leela (Play) to understand its mysticism. He took the responsibility of decorating the image of mother Kali and performing worship of mother everyday.  He would become overwhelmed with different spiritual moods.  Sometimes he would lose his consciousness of the outside world and also he would lose the awareness that he had a body.  Sometimes he would hold cotton wool in front of Mother Kali’s nose to see if she was breathing. 

Sri Ramakrishna used to talk to divine mother regularly.  The Pandits visited him from far and away places to argue with him.  When their arguments reaches highest pitches, Sri Ramakrishna simply touches with his little finger.  At his touch Pandits lose all their wits and become speechless. 

Activities of the external powers of god take place in the domain of sense perfection.  These can be described through words.  Activities of God’s internal powers is impossible to describe them in words.  Sri Ramakrishna’s leela can be experienced but it cannot be described.  Sri Ramakrishna is revealed and concealed at the same time. Sri Ramakrishna was a very simple as well as a very complicated personality.

He was an enigma to the uninitiated.

‘’NOT ENOUGH EVIDENCE, GOD!’’

Bertrand Russel, the famous mathematician and philosopher from UK in the early Twentieth Century, was once confronted by reporters as to why he does not believe in God and if God materialised before him what would he say.  Russel’s remark was extraordinary.  He said he would say to God “Not enough Evidence, God”!  Does God exists? Another mathematician and philosopher Pascal from France gave a worldly advice to the people.  “Believe in God.  If you are right God would not punish you.  If you are wrong you won’t loose anything”.  Witty people say “God did not create man but man created God”. 

Philosophers and theologians tries hard to prove the existence of God.  This debate mainly exists in philosophy.  Science does not believe in supernatural thing “God”.  Pascal, the French philosopher in his book “Pensees”(thoughts) writes in favor of belief in God.  He says, there are flaws, but we can still see in it the confluence of important strands.  Buddha never believed in God.  His thrust was on the present and always said cleanse your mind.

There are many philosophical issues with existence of God.  Some definitions of God are not specific.  Argument in favour of God include metaphysical and empirical types.  Arguments against the existence of God deductive, empirical and inductive arguments.  “Atheists say God does not exist”.  Theists says “God exists and this can be proved”.  This is strong theism.  Theists believe that God created everything that exists and has ever existed.  God is immortal and has powers to control nature beyond the powers of human beings.

In the ancient Indian Wisdom, the word God is not mentioned.  Brahman, scriptures says, is the supreme authority.  It is Athman (soul, self).  We human beings have self (soul) too. But we are empirical world (illusion).  Supreme authority Brahman’s self and we human being’s is same.  When we achieve Moksha (liberation)  we realise that empirical world withers away.  It is only one (Brahman) and there is no second.  This is Monism of Advaitha philosophy. 

Ancient Hindu scriptures decisively prove the existence of Brahman (God, if you want) Advaita philosophy says…………..

“know Thyself”

Nature of Man: Secrets of Death

Upanishads are important literature in the history of Indian religions and culture that played an important role in the development of spiritual ideal in ancient India.  Upanishads discuss the nature of ultimate reality.  Kathopanishad is one of the primary Upanishad that discusses the nature of man, knowledge, Atman (soul, self) and Moksha (liberation).  It is among the most widely studied Upanishad.  It was translated in to the Persian language in 17^th century which was further translated into the Latin language.

Kathopanishad is the story of little boy Nachiketa, the son of the sage Vajashravasa who meets ‘Yama (Indian deity of Death)’.  Their conversation revolves around the nature of man, knowledge and soul.  The speciality of this Upanishad is that we get the inner truth directly from the deity of death ‘Yama’. 

Vajashravasa (Nachiketa’s father) was performing an yajna (sacrifice) wherein he was suppose to give away everything he owned.  But he gave away old and useless things.  Nachiketa his young son thought that his father was defeating the very purpose of sacrifice and wanted to correct his father by asking his father to whom he would give away his son.  When Nachiketa repeated this question thrice his father got angry and said ‘to Yama’.  Thus, Nachiketa arrived at Yama’s abode.  After meeting Yama he begged him to explain what happens when a person dies.  A long dialogue followed between the two that covered the whole field of philosophy concerning the nature of man. 

‘Yama’ answered Nachiketa’s question.  The good and the pleasant are two different things.  They serve different purposes.  If a person chooses good does good to himself.  Who chooses pleasant misses the purpose of life and the purpose of life being liberation by escaping the cycle of life and death.  Liberation follows when we know ourselves.  Self is not easily seen.  It is not attainable by sense perception.  One does not see, rather self reveals itself to the seeker.

The self is pure consciousness.  The cosmic self and individual self are always together.  They are one and the same but empirically separated.  Man ‘s trouble is with his desires.  They never let him be in peace.  We have to detach ourselves from this. Nachiketa received from death of deity the knowledge of Brahman (Supreme Almighty) and attained union with Brahman.

Upanishads guide and prepare the seekers in their path for liberation.  For layman(like me), Upanishads are always inspiring and encouraging to think about our ancient wisdom.

Free will – A mirage…..?

The term free will belongs to the philosophers.  For centuries philosophers debated whether we, human beings have free will and got nowhere.  They have only agreed to disagree.  Hence, this has become an evergreen question without a convincing answer.  This is mainly because success in carrying out our wish depends in part on factors beyond our control. 

Bheeshmapitamaha, a character in Mahabharata, was the only one who could claim that he had controls over his will.  The ultimate test to prove this was he died at the time of his choice.  True freedom of the will involves liberation from desires.  A person with sugar complaint scrupulously avoid sweets, but we cannot consider this as an example of free will for this action (avoiding sweets) is based on the fear factor of bad health otherwise one has to suffer.

Most philosophers suppose that a concept of free will is closely connected to the concept of moral responsibility.  But significance of free will is not exhausted by its connection to moral responsibility.  Our own experience says that success in carrying out our wish depends (atleast) in part on factors wholly beyond our control.  Though we cannot see or explain the external constraints. 

Philosopher Rene Descartes identify the faculty of will with freedom of choice and he says that will by its very nature so free that it can never be constrained.  Philosophers may explain or describe free will in any way, but our practical experience say otherwise.  A strong willed person can only achieve a limited success.

If we all have free will we could make this earth a better place to live in,

No……?

‘AHAM BRAHMASMI’ (I am God)

The study of philosophy is sheer mental gymnasium. Confusion rules our mind. If the seeker manages to cross all these hurdles, philosophy takes us to another world.

Read on….

This world is unreal. The world we see as an object before us is unreal. But we, the empirical persons who are seeing the world, are real for we feel our reality as persons. From the transcendental point of view, the world, including the empirical persons who are seeing it are unreal (illusion, Maya). Briefly this is the sum total of Advaita(monism).

Advaita philosophy is one of the classical Hindu thoughts that seeks spiritual liberation through acquiring Vidya (knowledge). Advaita is a profound and comprehensive philosophy based on Vedic authority. Jagadguru (world teacher) AdiSankara propounded Advaita philosophy. Advaita philosophy emphasises ‘Jeevanmukti’ (liberation available in this life). This is in contrast to the other Hindu schools of thoughts that emphasises liberation after death.

Advaita rejects dual doctrine of the other school of Hindu thoughts. Non-dual Brahman (absolute reality) is beyond words, thought, time, space and causation. But these facts remain that at present we find ourselves in a universe of experience and are conscious of ourselves as living within it and bondage and freedom too are facts of empirical experience from the empirical point of view. Indefinable power of Brahman designated as Maya (illusion) is posited as the casual actor to explain the whole process of projection of the universe without infringing the absoluteness of Brahman.

Adi Sankara who propounded Advaita was a great towering personality who within a course of short life of thirty two years, brought about a thorough revolution in the social, religious, spiritual and philosophical life and thought of India. He laid the foundation of modern Hinduism as a composite, comprehensive universal basis.

This world is Maya (illusion), but Maya is not Maya to Brahman just as fire is not hot to itself. It is its nature. Does Maya exist as an independent entity? This is its relativity- it exists from phenomenal point of view but is not cognised from the noumenal (thing in itself) point of view. All this confusion arises because we are a part of the game within time, space and causation.

Aham Brahmasmi (I am god) is one of the four famous statements of Advaita.  For our ordinary mind it is difficult to grasp this phenomenal knowledge. Yet, just nodding acquaintance of the subject brings us a sort of fulfilment in life.

How strange feeling is this, that I who writes this piece and you who reads this is just an illusion (Maya)!