Bhim Shakuni (BS) Paradox.
The "Uttpatti" of this paradox can be attributed to Dr. Upendra Bhatt, my Uncle. This hilarious paradox is a comment on the existing socio- economic set up that we live in. The foundation of this paradox is based on a deep realisation that, at times, bad consequences that we face in life are on account of someone else's actions.
Well the story goes like this...
Bhim, the mighty Pandava, was a foodie, and loved to eat different types of food (that too in large quantities). Due to this habit, Bhim faced stomach upsets, and also had to visit the toilet lot many times. Bhim was faced with two options 1) To give up excessive eating 2) To sort out the issue of frequent visits to the toilet.
He thought about it and concluded that option one was not feasible, hence the second option had to be excercised.
Bhim, besides being a foodie was also a great devotee of Hanumanji. So, to resolve the issue once and for all, he started penance on banks of river Yamuna. One day, Hanumanji, was very pleased with his penance and appeared before him. He told Bhim" Dear Bhim, you are a great devotee of mine, I shall grant you one boon". Bhim was extremely happy, to have appeased Hanumanji and was ready with his request. (Shakuni mama, was a great pain for Bhim. He used to manipulate Duryodhan against the Pandavas, much to Bhim's dislike. Bhim had decided to set the record straight, without Shakuni knowing about it.) So Bhim, asked Hanumanji to grant him the following wish " When I eat once, Shakuni mama should go to the toilet twice". This strange request amused Hanumanji, but he knew that a boon was a boon, and had to be granted. " Tathastu" said Hanumanji...
Oh... what a licence... You can act as you wish and someone else will pay for the consequence of your action. Bhim was delighted and it goes without saying, he created a smelly mess for Shakuni mama...
We have similar situations in our society, offices etc. The people who act and the ones who are accountable for the consequence of these actions, are often two different people. Action without fear of consequences. Rights without accountability. How often do we see people in offices, personal life etc, pay for someone else's actions...Many a times.
Besides, the people who eat the fruits and the ones who clear the shit are often, two different people. It is not uncommon for people to create a mess when they know that they are not the ones who will pay for it ...
Other aspect of this paradox is a comment on an unequal division of work( A more refined 80:20 principle). Bosses/family members give simple work and benefits to their favourites and ask the hardworking/asocial/disliked people to clear the shit. That is 20% people are cause for 80% shit and they get away with it. Whereas, few people are faced with an almost impossible task of cleaning up. Many a times they do not even know the source of the mess.
Unfortunately, a role reversal for Shakuni is not in within his control. Just internalise, have you been a Bhim or a Shakuni lately.... I see many heads nodding in approval...
Sunday, January 31, 2010
Friday, January 29, 2010
Gross National Happiness
The world is moving from an " Aquarian" Age to a "Piscean" Age. It is high time that mankind too moves from Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to Gross National Happiness (GNH) as a tool to measure the true development of a nation. I am sure in years to come more people will accept this theory propounded by Bhutan and will be in harmony with their own self and nature. Now more nations than ever before, will value sustainable development, cultural integrity, ecosystem conservation, and good governance.
To start with definition of GNH - The concept of gross national happiness (GNH) was developed in an attempt to define an indicator that measures quality of life or social progress in more holistic and psychological terms than gross national product or GDP. As a chief economic indicator, GDP has numerous flaws long known to economists. GDP measures the amount of commerce in a country, but counts remedial and defensive expenditures (such as the costs of security, police, pollution clean up, etc.) as positive contributions to commerce. A better measure of economic well-being would deduct such costs, and add in other non-market benefits (such as volunteer work, unpaid domestic work, and unpriced ecosystem services) in arriving at an indicator of well-being. As economic development on the planet approaches or surpasses the limits of ecosystems to provide resources and absorb human effluents, calling into question the ability of the planet to continue to support civilization (per the arguments of Jared Diamond, among others), many people have called for getting "Beyond GDP" (the title of a recent EU conference) in order to measure progress not as the mere increase in commercial transations, nor as an increase in specifically economic well-being, but as an increase in general well-being as people themselves subjectively report it. GNH is a strong contributor to this movement to discard measurements of commercial transactions as a key indicator and to instead directly assess changes in the social and psychological well-being of populations.
The term was coined in 1972 byBhutan's formerKing Jigme Singye Wangchuck. He used the phrase to signal his commitment to building an economy that would serve Bhutan's unique culture based on Buddhist spiritual values. At first offered as a casual, offhand remark, the concept was taken seriously, as the Centre for Bhutan Studies, under the leadership of Kaarma Uru, developed a sophisticated survey instrument to measure the population's general level of well-being. The Canadian health epidemiologist Micheal Pennok had a major role in the design of the instrument, and uses (what he calls) a "de-Bhutanized" version of the survey in his work in Victoria, British Columbia.
Like many pschyological and social indicators, GNH is somewhat easier to state than to define with mathematical precision. Nonetheless, it serves as a unifying vision for Bhutan's five-year planning process and all the derived planning documents that guide the economic and development plans of the country. Proposed policies in Bhutan must pass a GNH review based on a GNH impact statement that is similar in nature to the Environmental Impact Statement required for development in the U.S.
While conventional development models stress economic growth as the ultimate objective, the concept of GNH is based on the premise that some forms of economic development are "uneconomic", a concept that is advanced by the nascent field of ecological economics. Such development costs more in loss of ecosystem services, and in the imposition of "urban disamenities," than it produces as a positive contribution to well-being. (The difficulty, of course, is that for many forms of development, the gains are taken privately, while the costs the development imposes are born generally and publicly.)
The Bhutanese grounding in Buddhist ideals suggests that beneficial development of human society takes place when material and spiritual development occur side by side to complement and reinforce each other. The four pillars of GNH are the promotion of sustainable development, preservation and promotion of cultural values, conservation of the natural enviornment, and establishment of good governance. At this level of generality, the concept of GNH is transcultural--a nation need not be Buddhist in order to value sustainable development, cultural integrity, ecosystem conservation, and good governance.
To start with definition of GNH - The concept of gross national happiness (GNH) was developed in an attempt to define an indicator that measures quality of life or social progress in more holistic and psychological terms than gross national product or GDP. As a chief economic indicator, GDP has numerous flaws long known to economists. GDP measures the amount of commerce in a country, but counts remedial and defensive expenditures (such as the costs of security, police, pollution clean up, etc.) as positive contributions to commerce. A better measure of economic well-being would deduct such costs, and add in other non-market benefits (such as volunteer work, unpaid domestic work, and unpriced ecosystem services) in arriving at an indicator of well-being. As economic development on the planet approaches or surpasses the limits of ecosystems to provide resources and absorb human effluents, calling into question the ability of the planet to continue to support civilization (per the arguments of Jared Diamond, among others), many people have called for getting "Beyond GDP" (the title of a recent EU conference) in order to measure progress not as the mere increase in commercial transations, nor as an increase in specifically economic well-being, but as an increase in general well-being as people themselves subjectively report it. GNH is a strong contributor to this movement to discard measurements of commercial transactions as a key indicator and to instead directly assess changes in the social and psychological well-being of populations.
The term was coined in 1972 byBhutan's formerKing Jigme Singye Wangchuck. He used the phrase to signal his commitment to building an economy that would serve Bhutan's unique culture based on Buddhist spiritual values. At first offered as a casual, offhand remark, the concept was taken seriously, as the Centre for Bhutan Studies, under the leadership of Kaarma Uru, developed a sophisticated survey instrument to measure the population's general level of well-being. The Canadian health epidemiologist Micheal Pennok had a major role in the design of the instrument, and uses (what he calls) a "de-Bhutanized" version of the survey in his work in Victoria, British Columbia.
Like many pschyological and social indicators, GNH is somewhat easier to state than to define with mathematical precision. Nonetheless, it serves as a unifying vision for Bhutan's five-year planning process and all the derived planning documents that guide the economic and development plans of the country. Proposed policies in Bhutan must pass a GNH review based on a GNH impact statement that is similar in nature to the Environmental Impact Statement required for development in the U.S.
While conventional development models stress economic growth as the ultimate objective, the concept of GNH is based on the premise that some forms of economic development are "uneconomic", a concept that is advanced by the nascent field of ecological economics. Such development costs more in loss of ecosystem services, and in the imposition of "urban disamenities," than it produces as a positive contribution to well-being. (The difficulty, of course, is that for many forms of development, the gains are taken privately, while the costs the development imposes are born generally and publicly.)
The Bhutanese grounding in Buddhist ideals suggests that beneficial development of human society takes place when material and spiritual development occur side by side to complement and reinforce each other. The four pillars of GNH are the promotion of sustainable development, preservation and promotion of cultural values, conservation of the natural enviornment, and establishment of good governance. At this level of generality, the concept of GNH is transcultural--a nation need not be Buddhist in order to value sustainable development, cultural integrity, ecosystem conservation, and good governance.
Facade in Sansara
We as human beings want others to perceive us as good, amicable, social, just, honest, intelligent, hardworking, trustworthy, capable etc. In Sansara, knowingly or unknowingly we create a facade so that people believe, that, we are better than what we actually are. This need for facade is so important to us that we do not realise that have actually created it. We want others to have a "good impression" about us. To propagate the importance of this thought process, we have also coined a phrase " First impression is the last impression". Generations after generations are taught the benefits of facade.
We wear nice clothes, jewellery, smile, shoes etc to impress others. Again, the subconscious want is to make others believe that we are better than what we actually are. This habit has got ingrained so deeply, that a mere thought that we are deceiving others by creating a facade, puts us on a defensive mode. We just do not accept this allegation of facade/deception.
I would like to ask one question. Would we dress, behave and act in the same way if we are alone in a room. We are taught to give good opinion about others in public(the same people whom we detest in private). We smile at people we hate (under the garb of being polite and well mannered). In fact, this is what is expected out of us.
Infact, the idea of deception and facade has been made essential to Sansara.
However, most people go about their entire life living in this deception and are perhaps happy about it. Some others realise it and get fed up with it and leave Sansara. Few just complaint about it and find solace in friends who are little less deceptive than an average Sansari.
So, does moving away from Sansara mean moving away from your home, marriage, kids, education, job, society etc. The Answer is a big NO. Moving away from Sansara means moving away from the deception. Moving away from the need and want of facade(The want that people should think high of us or that we should be appreciated, respected etc).
In fact the first step to sprituality is to realise that facade and deception exists in Sansara and it is time to move away from it. It is an internal urge to know oneself (including ones own faults). A spiritual man gets upset if people perceive him to be better than what he actually is(A feeling that is exactly opposite to a Sansari's feeling). Hence, the movement from Sansara is a mental movement from deception/facade to openess. From mental impurity to purity. It should not always be perceived as a movement from house to a cave.
"Once you start finding more faults in yourself than in others you should realise that the spiritual journey has begun."
We wear nice clothes, jewellery, smile, shoes etc to impress others. Again, the subconscious want is to make others believe that we are better than what we actually are. This habit has got ingrained so deeply, that a mere thought that we are deceiving others by creating a facade, puts us on a defensive mode. We just do not accept this allegation of facade/deception.
I would like to ask one question. Would we dress, behave and act in the same way if we are alone in a room. We are taught to give good opinion about others in public(the same people whom we detest in private). We smile at people we hate (under the garb of being polite and well mannered). In fact, this is what is expected out of us.
Infact, the idea of deception and facade has been made essential to Sansara.
However, most people go about their entire life living in this deception and are perhaps happy about it. Some others realise it and get fed up with it and leave Sansara. Few just complaint about it and find solace in friends who are little less deceptive than an average Sansari.
So, does moving away from Sansara mean moving away from your home, marriage, kids, education, job, society etc. The Answer is a big NO. Moving away from Sansara means moving away from the deception. Moving away from the need and want of facade(The want that people should think high of us or that we should be appreciated, respected etc).
In fact the first step to sprituality is to realise that facade and deception exists in Sansara and it is time to move away from it. It is an internal urge to know oneself (including ones own faults). A spiritual man gets upset if people perceive him to be better than what he actually is(A feeling that is exactly opposite to a Sansari's feeling). Hence, the movement from Sansara is a mental movement from deception/facade to openess. From mental impurity to purity. It should not always be perceived as a movement from house to a cave.
"Once you start finding more faults in yourself than in others you should realise that the spiritual journey has begun."
Consumer OR Consumed
It is widely believed that, in this age of consumerism, each one of us is a consumer. Infact, such a belief is taught in all Marketing classes around the world. When I thought about it, I was almost convinced. I consume many products like food, toothpaste, soap etc. However when I thought a little deeper, I realised that each one of us is also "the consumed".
We are consumed by others for their physical, emotional, academic, spiritual and other needs. When one talks of being a consumer one perceives oneself to be in control of things. One who can make all choices. The one who has the discretion to consume selectively whatever is available, as per one's needs. However as I mentioned earlier we also "the consumed". Hence we are being consumed by others as per their discretion, and as per their needs and requirement.
I just wanted to leave an idea with you'll to ponder upon. Are you a consumer or "the consumed".
We are consumed by others for their physical, emotional, academic, spiritual and other needs. When one talks of being a consumer one perceives oneself to be in control of things. One who can make all choices. The one who has the discretion to consume selectively whatever is available, as per one's needs. However as I mentioned earlier we also "the consumed". Hence we are being consumed by others as per their discretion, and as per their needs and requirement.
I just wanted to leave an idea with you'll to ponder upon. Are you a consumer or "the consumed".
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Superpower
Indians want India to be a super power. Well, what exactly is a super power? Is it a country that has maximum number of nuclear weapons? Is it a country that has maximum financial clout ? Different people have different perceptions and ideas of a super power. When Indian's say " I want India to be a super power" what they actually mean is " India should not have corruption, it should be neat and clean, issues/problems pertaining to shelter, roads, electricity, health, education etc should be resolved. They also want India to be a leader in sports and a strong country which can counter terrorism.
For few elite Indians, being a superpower means, having a fashion week in Mumbai/Delhi wherein all leading labels around the world showcase their products. For an industrialist being a superpower means financial clout and free flow of labour and capital in the country. For few Indians, sending space/moon missions is ultimate proof of being a superpower.
That is to say, different people from different walks of life have diffent perceptions about a super power. However, one thing is clear, most Indian's want India to be a super power.
Now let me ask few simple questions. How many super powers have you seen in world where majority population does not pay income tax? Where most polititicans are corrupt, where majority population does not follow traffic rules unless strictly monitored by traffic cops? Well, none...
To become a superpower you need to address smaller things first. If majority, if not entire population of India takes care of few small things, India will automatically become a super power:
1) Honesty
2) Civic Sense
3) Integrity
4) Punctuality
5) No caste, gender, regional and religious biases.(Especially when, people are voting for a representative).
6) Focus on quality in all spheres of life including security issues, health and education.
Reaching the top requires small and steady steps by majority of our population. Few cosmetic changes will not do. Bigger changes will come when we become more organised, punctual, honest and have correct perspective of world and our country.
For few elite Indians, being a superpower means, having a fashion week in Mumbai/Delhi wherein all leading labels around the world showcase their products. For an industrialist being a superpower means financial clout and free flow of labour and capital in the country. For few Indians, sending space/moon missions is ultimate proof of being a superpower.
That is to say, different people from different walks of life have diffent perceptions about a super power. However, one thing is clear, most Indian's want India to be a super power.
Now let me ask few simple questions. How many super powers have you seen in world where majority population does not pay income tax? Where most polititicans are corrupt, where majority population does not follow traffic rules unless strictly monitored by traffic cops? Well, none...
To become a superpower you need to address smaller things first. If majority, if not entire population of India takes care of few small things, India will automatically become a super power:
1) Honesty
2) Civic Sense
3) Integrity
4) Punctuality
5) No caste, gender, regional and religious biases.(Especially when, people are voting for a representative).
6) Focus on quality in all spheres of life including security issues, health and education.
Reaching the top requires small and steady steps by majority of our population. Few cosmetic changes will not do. Bigger changes will come when we become more organised, punctual, honest and have correct perspective of world and our country.
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Life
We are often taught that the circumstances that we face in life are results of our past karma. This theory may be correct or it may be incorrect. The fact is, we cannot change our past karma's. What we can do is face these circumstances, whether good or bad, with the most suitable response. It is not the cirumstances that we face in life but the attitude with which we live our life determines our happiness and sorrow. Daily, we come accross people who are less priviledged than us, in terms of money, education etc., but are more happier. The reason is two fold:
1) Positive attitude towards life
2) Lesser fear
People who are happier in life are also the ones who complaint lesser in similar conditions vis a vis an unhappy person. That is to say, if two people face similar bad circumstances, the one who complaints lesser is more likely to be happier in life than the one who complaints more. So, it is not the circumstance but our response/impact on our mind which makes us happier.
1) Positive attitude towards life
2) Lesser fear
People who are happier in life are also the ones who complaint lesser in similar conditions vis a vis an unhappy person. That is to say, if two people face similar bad circumstances, the one who complaints lesser is more likely to be happier in life than the one who complaints more. So, it is not the circumstance but our response/impact on our mind which makes us happier.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)