India, one of the oldest civilisations of the world, has stood for certain eternal values — sathya, dharma, prema, shanti and ahimsa. Truth is one, but the wise ones interpret it differently. The eclectic tradition holds that all systems of thought lead to the same truth. Love was the emotional bond that held together the diverse elements, whether it was a group of human beings in a society or family or man and his environment. This love was the logical conclusion and a reflection of the philosophy that all life was essentially one. From this flowed the concept of Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam — the earth is one family. If there is no stranger in the universe, how can there be conflict? As the philosophers have maintained: if I harm someone, I demolish a part of myself. It was these great ideals, again and again propounded by a succession of seers, rishis, saints and kings which led Indiainto its greatness, and made it eclectic and tolerant.
C. Rajagopalachari has pointed out in the Introduction to the book Bhagavad Gita that a reverent spirit is necessary to understand any religion. He wrote: “The cause of all causes, the law of all laws cannot be seized by the highest effort of human reasoning and investigation … The fact remains that the part cannot comprehend the whole, however excellent it may be shaped. The symbol of the serpent with the tail in its mouth as if swallowing itself illustrates the limitation of the human mind in its efforts to grasp the All. Even a giant who stands on a platform cannot lift it. We cannot jump off the ultimate cause on which we stand and on which we depend for every motion of the mind, in order that we may get round it or measure it.”
S. Radhakrishnan, who was President of India and one of the world’s greatest modern philosophers, in his book The Hindu View of Life wrote: “The intellectual representations of the religious mystery are relative and symbolic. Our accounts of God are not full or final. We are like little children on the seashore trying to fill our shells with water from the sea. While we cannot exhaust the waters of the deep by means of or shells, every drop that we attempt to gather into our tiny shells is a part of the authentic waters. Our intellectual representations differ simply because they bring out different facets of the same central reality … truth wears vestures of many colours and speaks in strange tongues … Boehme says: Consider the birds in our forests, they praise God each in his own way, in diverse tones and fashions. Think your God is vexed by this diversity and desires to silence discordant voices? All the forms of being are dear to the infinite Being Himself.”
It is not fair to God or man to assume that one people are the chosen of God, that their religion occupies a central place in the religious development of mankind, and that all others should borrow from them or suffer spiritual destitution … After all, what counts is not creed but conduct … The truly religious never worry about other people’s beliefs.”
Developing the spiritual core of humanity does not mean propagating any particular religion. The Vedic ideals declare: “A religion is not religion at all if it asserts its superiority over other faiths” and “Practice only that part of the discipline which helps you to grow without hurting others.” Unfortunately, religions have lost the essence of spirituality. Moses, Christ, Muhammad, Buddha and Sankaracharya, each came bringing some different aspect of spiritual truth.
“The chief among the reasons of man’s failure is his imperfect nature dominated by his ego. In religion, the ego incites him to an attitude of superior separatism and he would love to be pledged to a sect or dogma because it is his own creation. In politics, it is symbolised in the State whose absolute power must be worshipped by all. In science, it is glorified when man takes pride in his achievements and refuses to believe in anything that cannot be perceived by his physical senses. It is this ego which persists in every so called triumph of human effort, ,” says The Life Divine.
While India has been able to maintain the democratic system without any break since Independence, although in a number of developing countries, democracy got distorted or was transformed into various forms of anti-democratic rule, there is conflict all round — among political parties in State legislatures and Parliament and outside, in elections, between the executive and the judiciary, in society as caste and religious conflicts, matrimonial disputes and violence against women. There is dispute on sharing of waters and territorial divisions. A large number of such conflicts or disputes find their way to courts. But as the Chief Justice of India observed in a recent case, the Supreme Court cannot be expected to pass orders on every issue bothering the country and create Ram Rajya. On the unrest in Kashmir, in the Bench which included him, he gave a very practical message to the government to help those who are striving for peace and book those who are fomenting trouble or inciting violence. There is a need for all those interested in peace to work in harmony in such situations, particularly the political parties. Violence and terrorism have no place in any civilised society, much less in India, the home of ahimsa. But wisdom lies in refusing to let the speech and acts of a few provoke us into any form of rancour or ill-will between communities or regions.
When he went to Kashmir as a young man in 1936, Jawaharlal Nehru wrote: “Sometimes I would lie under the pine trees and listen to the voice of the wandering wind, whispering many strange things into my years, lulling my senses and cooling the fever in my brain. Finding me unguarded and open to attack, she would cunningly point out the folly of men’s ways in the world below, their unceasing strife, their passions and hatred, the corruption of their politics and the degradation of their ideals. Was it worthwhile going back to them and wasting one’s life’s efforts in dealing with them?”
Incidentally, Nehru’s first Council of Ministers had 15 Ministers chosen on merit including from rival camps. Out of the 15, B.R. Ambedkar (SCF Party), Sardar Baldev Singh (Panthic Party) and Syama Prasada Mookerjee (Hindu Mahasabha) were from other parties. Vasant Sathe, in his book National Government: Agenda for a New India, proposed that when a national consensus and united effort is imperative, it becomes essential to think in terms of a national government even if a political party has a clear mandate.
The most effective way of dealing with differences, with conflict, with disagreement is not through force. It is through negotiation, through compromise, through trying to see the point of view of the other, working together, recognising and respecting the essential, irreducible human spirit which is common to us all. There is need for positive thinking and not looking at the faults or shortcomings of others.
gupta_naresh_06@yahoo.co.in
