Questions, questions, questions

The simplicity of Krishna's argument, and the utter difficulty of practising it, always stuns me. Krishna, through out the Gita, makes a very simple point - Do what you must, what the situation demands (from a larger cosmic point of view) unfettered by personal desire, power, lust, envy, anger, fear, vengance or any other emotion. Do it out of love he says. Not the love that is personal and exclusive, but love that is as large as life and all inclusive. Only then are you acting in favour of the cosmic balance of the universe.

It is this same principle that allows Krishna to manipulate and break the rules of righteous war, to dupe the Kauravas at every stage of the battle, allowing the Pandavas to win. Yet, at the end of the war, the Pandavas have done Krishna's bidding without understanding his purpose (with the possible exception of Yudhishtra who is the only Pandava who enters heaven).

Yet, as an individual, when I think about anything, it is hard to view a situation free of personal prejudice. How does one, at any point, determine whether a course of action is being undertaken because that is truly what the situation demands or because there is a subconscious desire for a particular outcome that one has not been able to identify yet? When do you know that you have peeled back all layers of prejudice and conditioning and desire? How does one calculate the merits and demerits of a situation without taking into account the gain or loss (happiness or sorrow) that one is expecting from it?

Yet another reading of a retelling of the Mahabharat and I only have more questions. Still more questions and no answers at all (that in itself is perhaps, a good thing).

PS: I do recommend everyone to read at least a couple of retellings of the Mahabharat. The retellings themselves are an exercise in understanding perspective and points of view. Some of the ones I've read are:

1. Mahasamar (Narendra Kohli): This one is in Hindi and was recommended by a friend who knows the epic better than anyone else I know!
2. Palace of Illusions (Chitra Banerji Divakaruni): The Mahabharata told from Draupadi's perspective, the woman who is the pivot of the plot of the Mahabharata.
3. Mahabharata retold by C Rajagopalachari: This one was my first, perhaps the simplest, as the tale would be told to a child.
4. Difficulty of being good (Gurcharan Das): This is not a direct retelling of the Mahabharata but an analysis of its characters and plot, the lessons that can be drawn from it and the continuing relevance of the epic in present times.
5. Jaya (Devdutt Pattanaik): This is one I just finished. It is a simple retelling but what I love about it is the little side stories and the notes at the end of each chapter pointing out the moral, sociological and political debates and setting the historical context of vedic lifestyle for the reader. It brings out both the context that created the Mahabharata as well as the underpinning values that make it eternally relevant. 

All of these books are available in India on http://www.flipkart.com and http://www.indiaplaza.in

At this point, I am regretting not knowing to read a vernacular language such as Tamil. Would love to read a folk retelling of the epic!

The way we were meant to be

"God did not mean for us to be this way. If he had, he would have given us _________"

I've heard this refrain a million times and if you push the refrain enough, it always ends with the other person saying "yes, maybe we'd be better off in the caves, the way we were supposed to be." But I always do wonder why we as a species are the way we are.

Let me clarify what I mean here. Why are we, human, so different from other animals? In terms of sensory abilities and physical endurance, we are far far inferior to most high-order mammals. Most commonplace answers such as "language" and "learning and teaching" apply in great measures to other species as well. Why, then is it, that we alone moved out of our evolutionary beginnings as bi-pedal hunter gatherers?

The book I'm reading currently (I am a strange loop) throws some light on this. Our ability to create analogies and isomorphisms expands our ability to create, manipulate and extend things beyond their natural uses. To be able to use coal not only as fuel, but to be able to modify it and use it to create steel. Our capacity to process perceptions and to be able to reference things (from others of our species, written words, our own memories) allows us to move beyond that which we can directly experience. There IS a greater mental capacity that has enabled us to move beyond the caves and our intellect isn't a self-effacing fancy.

So my only answer to those with that refrain: Evolution (I prefer that word to God) may not have meant for us to be this way, but it certainly did not mean for us to be stuck in the caves. The way we are right now is a function of the countless choices made in every single moment not just by humans but by all of existence. We may have been something else but I very much doubt if we'd have been stuck in the caves for all eternity.