Monday, May 04, 2020

Dharma & Religion

The reason why "western universalism (XXXism) " is a big deal, fill in any of many things into the XXX, is that Dharmiks have been traditionally unable or unwilling to give a clear, coherent answer to the questions:
1. What are your core beliefs/values?

2. What is the hierarchy of your literature that I can go look up to learn more about these?

The answer usually degenerates into

1. The Question is Improper!

2. It is wrong to even THINK of Core Beliefs or Values, those are WESTERN concepts!

3. Our literature starts with the Vedas (sorry, it is blasphemy to speak of the Vedas as literature onlee), Ramayana (no that is not Vedas), BG (no, that is not Vedas), Puranas (obviously not)..

4. But my Core Belief is that if I don't dunk my skull into this pond, facing to the East and holding my nose and/or my ears, before 7AM every day, the whole Universe may go down the tubes. Rain or shine. If you try this in a land where the pond is frozen, well, that is your fault for cross the seas. Brasht onlee!

This is why XXXX Universalism and all other nonsense run riot in urban anglicised Indians, not to mention every where else. So develop clear answers. Or frame new questions that anyone can ask and get clear answers, that define SD/Hinduism/ whatever u call it.Is this meant to be "beliefs or values"? Is there an implication that values arise from beliefs? etc. Anyway, I will give an answer to move the conversation along:

The four goals of human existence are 'dharma, artha, kama, moksha'. The latter three are to be pursued in accordance with dharma. This is the core of Hindu life.
I think the problem starts when people ask Hindus about Hinduism. The assumption is that the Hindus must be knowledgeable about Hinduism. But most of the time, most of the Hindus are not knowledgeable about Hinduism. This is a very common thing in the world. Followers of most of the ideologies do not know the full details of their ideologies. People only know certain aspects of the ideology which they follow. Only those who study the ideologies in full detail would know it properly. Others would only have some vague and general knowledge.

So, most Hindus would have some knowledge about Dharma, Karma, re-incarnation, Gods, Goddesses, ...etc. But, they are not the right people to go to, if one wants the full knowledge about Hinduism. The best thing is to ask an expert(guru) or to consult the scripture when one wants know about a topic. That's why importance of guru has been stressed.
In Hinduism, there are 2 types of Dharma:
a) Samanya Dharma (General)
b) Vishesha Dharma (Special) (Contextual)

Samanya Dharma(General):

It seems, according to Manu:

" ahimsa satyam asteyam shaucham indriyanigrahametam samasikam dharmam chaaturvarnye abhravin manuh.."

Ahimsa(Non-violence), Satyam(Truth), Asteyam(Non-Stealing), Shaucham(Cleanliness) and Indriya-nigraham(Control of senses) are the Dharma of all the 4 varnas.

Most educated Indians are offered the choice of "Western Univeralism" versus Indian family values and they choose the former because they are unable to face up to questions or comments that state up front as they have barely read up on Dharma (our own education system under the successive governments ensured no learning of ancient scriptures/texts). Moreover, the education policy controlled by Marxists/Islamists ( It didn't help that Education ministers for first 20 years post independence were all muslims), deliberately put out the view that Hinduism is backward while monotheism is modern aka western construct.

1. The caste system is bad (whoops its easier to hide the fact that I and my entire extended family are Madhwa Brahmins than explain. So I say "yeah. Caste is bad. I don't follow it)

2. Idolatry is bad (oops we do have idols at home so I say "Well uh er not really. We believe in one God bla bla)

3. You believe in an elephant headed God or a bloodthirsty goddess? (Er um these are primitive beliefs. people are moving away from all that)

4. Do you believe in arranged marriages (oooops - mine was arranged so I'll say "Oh you see it's not like that you know. Nowadays you get to meet and get to know your future partner)Indians have, exactly as pointed out, internalized and accepted the characterizations of Indian society made by others.

It is those same others who are now offering us jobs and wealth and either we accept their definitions or we get branded as someone not worth associating with.Let alone explaining Sandhya vandanam which most people do not do, we are unable to admit that our jati is our extended family and our jati is still used in India for education and job reservations. So much for the lie that the "caste system" is going away. We find it difficult to point out that we have no caste. Only jati. But the connection of jati with profession does not exist any more. The system of jati ("caste") based reservation was precisely to remove the link between varna and jati. Unfortunately even the Indian legal system has internalized the western definition of caste.

The people who wrote our constitution and our lawmakers have internalized that.We are unable to explain that we still have arranged marriages. we are unable to say that Indian society is a family centered society. When you have a son or daughter, your mother or mother in law will come and live with you to help. But we are unable to admit that we are a family centered society. The system of arranged marriages was designed to remove family objections and interference in an attempt to reduce incompatibilities.

The fact that it does not necessarily work is not the point.There is absolutely nothing wrong with idol worship. In fact the name "idol worship" is a misnomer. The idol serves as a central point which serves as an area around which people collect for prayer. The concept of having a church or a mosque is also merely to have a collection point.

There is s philosophical issue in Christianity and Islam where it is alleged that if you sit in front of an image you will start believing that the image is God. This is complete nonsense. No Hindu believes that an image of God is God. The image is simply a meeting point for worship and prayer. Anyone who pays brief attention to the meaning of Hindu prayers (as recited in Sanskrit) will know that the first act of prayer in front of any idol is to pray to a formless omnipresent God to please come and occupy the idol for a brief while while you worship that god within that idol. "Invocations" that are sung before any Indian/Hindu function are simply a prayer-invitation for God to be present there and guide us. God is invariably "invoked" at the outset.

Note that we never blow out lamps or candles. Fire/Agni is life. We always light them. Next time you have a birthday party, light lamps, don't blow them out.The multiarmed "bloodthirsty" durga and the elephant headed God are simply artistic manifestations of stories of good over evil and the power of God to help you or make you feel better - no different from any other type of worship.

The route I take is that I have simply stopped referring to myself as a follower of a religion, but as a follower of Hindu dharma.Dharma and religion have some differences. Religion is the belief in and the worship of God and that is there for all Hindus who wish to worship God. But there is something more for those who do not believe in God.

The first is a system of moral values (dharma)The ten rules of Manu Dharma are:
  • Patience (Dhriti) It is the most essential rule of Dharma...
  • Forgiveness (Kshama) ...
  • Piety or self control (Dama) ...
  • Honesty (Asteya) ...
  • Holiness (Shauch) ...
  • Control of senses (Indraiya-nigrah) ...
  • Reasoning (Dhi) ...
  • Learning or knowledge (Vidya)
- to be followed whether or not you believe in God.The second is a philosophical exploration of the origins of the universe and cosmos - explanations that are said to become self evident if one is interested in following the rules of study, meditation and yoga that form part of the Hindu body of knowledge. 
In fact the Vedas deal in this most esoteric aspect of Hindu dharma. In my limited understanding, the primary axioms of Sanathana Dharma(Hinduism) is:
a)'Veda(s) are the eternal truth.'
b)'Veda(s) are divine. They are not man-made.'
c)'Veda(s) are the authority on all things.'
d) 'All the experiences, words, customs and ideologies of the people that are in consonance with the Vedic teachings are acceptable. 
And all the experiences, words, customs and ideologies of the people
contradictory to Vedic teachings are rejected.'The word Veda refers to all the four Vedas along with Vedanta(Upanishads).-------
Based on the above fundamental axioms, Indic philosophies have been categorised as 

Astika 

Nastika
Astika Philosophies are 6(Shat Darshanas). They accept the Vedic authority. They are:

a) Nyāyá, the school of logic (by Gautama)

b) Vaiśeṣika, the school that proposes atoms (by Kanada)

c) Sāṃkhya, the enumeration school (by Kapila)

d) Yoga, which assumes the metaphysics of Sāṃkhya (by Patanjali)

e) Mimāṃsā or Purva Mimāṃsā, the tradition of Vedic exegesis that stresses on the importance of Vedic rituals. (restored by Kumarilla Bhatta - who is disciple of Jaimini - who is disciple of Vyasa)

f) Vedanta or Uttara Mimāṃsā, the Upaniṣadic tradition.(restored by Adi Shankaracharya - who is disciple of Govinda Bhagavatpada - Gauda Bhagavatpada - Shuka - Vyasa)
Nastika philosophies. They reject the Vedic authority. They are:
a) Buddhism (supposedly by Siddhartha Gautama)

b) Jainism (supposedly by Rishabha, the first Tirthankara. Mahavira is the last of the 24 Tirthankaras.)
c) Cārvāka - Materialistic and hedonistic school of thought.-----

Then, there are Tantras or Agamas. The Tantras like Darshanas(Philosophies) can also be Vedic or Non-Vedic. All the Tantras/Agamas (or the aspects of Tantras) that are in consonance with Vedas are acceptable. Rest are rejected.
The Tantras also claim their origin from divine beings. Even so, if the teachings are contradictory to Vedas, they are rejected.-----Then, there are Smritis or Dharma Shaastras. 

Smritis are authored by the Rishis. They deal with the rules of conduct. There are several Smritis.The general rule is that the whole (or part) of a Smriti which is conflicting with Vedas is rejected.-----

Then, there are Itihasaas(Ramayana & Mahabharatha) along with the 18 Puranas and 18 Upa-Puranas. Generally, they can be treated similar to Dharma Shaastras.-----Finally, there are traditions of family. Each family follow certain traditions and customs which it has inherited from its ancestors. These traditions are also acceptable and encouraged as long as they are not in conflict with the above mentioned scriptural teachings.

To be continued to dissect Religion...

Credits : All learning and work of Johnee,Dr Shiv, A Gupta and many more

Thursday, February 20, 2020

Cost of learning is failure!



A few days back, I was speaking to a friend and colleague Aarti Gill, founder of OZiva (health nutrition brand) about three sets of people in life and brands in business.
Discoverers : They hypothise and find something new that exists, can be created or tamed. They make attempts but are restricted due to resource crunch or lack of will.
Conquerors : They conquer the landscapes i.e. lands, breakthrough technologies, pioneer new product usages.
Colonisers : They come and colonise/monopolise the markets by correcting some of the early mistakes of conquerors/pioneers and get a larger market share in the meantime conquerer saps/loses energy in the initial fight creating that market.
Example I gave was about P&G's near monopoly of diaper/sanitary napkin market (coloniser) while Johnson was the conqueror.. creating a diaper. They made the mistake of using expensive Egyptian cotton and thus was expensive. Even though the concept of diapers and sanitary pads was lapped up but the usage was rather restricted due to high cost unless P&G changed the material and brought down the costs.
Result? No one knows that it was Johnson who came up with the idea of diapers while 'pampers' rules the western world. Johnson is too embarrassed of the drubbing and we rarely get to learn about the mistakes. However, calling it a mistake is a Hindsight bias.. Imagine had Johnsons not made the first diaper?
What is the lesson that I am trying to impart here?
I believe that our society's "mistakephobia" is crippling, a problem that begins in most elementary schools, where we learn to learn what we are taught rather than to form our own goals and to figure out how to achieve them.
We are fed with facts and tested and those who make the fewest mistakes are considered to be the smart ones, so we learn it is embarrassing to not know and to make mistakes. Our education system spends virtually no time on how to learn from mistakes, yet this is critical to real learning. As a result, school typically doesn't prepare young people for real life - unless their lives are spent following instructions and pleasing others
Businesses are even more severe in punishment towards adventurous. Even though everyone wants an 'Entrepreneurial' manager (both are so contradictory words), they are the first to shoot down in interviews itself, anyone with a different or courageous idea.
Imagine if you quit your job pursuing a business idea (yours truly being one) & most struggle given 90% of new businesses fail, to get back into corporate is a challenge. Continuing doing the same thing what Shiv kumar (my ex CEO at Philips) used to call, "Incrementalism of decimal point managers", is considered an excellent career choice while someone who failed trying new thing is deemed failure. Even though he may have more learning about consumers & markets, failure being the biggest teacher.
"I get flack for saying , “This is a nice college, but the really great educator is McDonald’s.” They hate me for saying this and think I’m a slimy creature. But McDonald’s hires people with bad work habits, trains them, and teaches them to come to work on time and have good work habits. I think a lot of what goes on there is better than at Harvard.” - Munger