Indian IT to Pay for 9/11 Healthcare

Ever since I started to understand him, I have kept an opinion that Obama is a man with a big mouth and a small vision – big mouth because he promises everyone a moon (each) and small vision because he thinks like he were administering a class of 20 students (who would always obey him). In his recent move to make me think about him the same way, he has made India and Indian IT companies pay for the healthcare of 9/11 Islamic terrorist attack victims!
 

Obama signs 9/11 health bill, sticks India with paying for it
 

https://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_obama-signs-9-11-health-bill-sticks-india-with-paying-for-it_1490018
 

Indian techies slam US visa hike to pay 9/11 healthcare bill
 

https://www.ndtv.com/article/india/indian-techies-slam-us-visa-hike-to-pay-9-11-healthcare-bill-74675
 

I am sure Obama won’t have looked at India to pay for these medical expenses without being infatuated by and envying India’s success story. I wonder how far he is going to take his anti-India policies. Will he make Indian auto companies pay for toilet paper expenses in the White House? Or Indian biotech companies pay for yoga expenses borne by unemployed Americans? I wish he loses his next elections – and India and this world get rid of his low-vision populist decisions. I believe a partnership between India and the US is the need for both, and the partnership has to be on equal terms. And I think Obama doesn’t believe in such equality. At least his actions prove this.

Wisdom of Ganesha

Throughout our childhood, we learn so many lessons taught to us by means of stories. Often such stories contain our gods and hence they leave maximum impact on our minds. Here is a small portion of a legend, retold by Devdutt Pattanaik, explaining the concept of our insatiable want:

Kubera, the king of Yakshas, is the treasurer of the gods. One day, he paid a visit to Kailasa, the abode of Shiva, the hermit-god, where he met Shiva’s elephant-headed son, the corpulent Ganesha. He thought to himself, “Ganesha clearly loves food and Shiva can clearly not afford to feed him to his heart’s content.” So as a favor to Shiva Kubera offered to feed Ganesha one meal. When Ganesha accepted the invitation and entered Kubera’s kitchen, the Yaksha-king said, “Eat to your heart’s content.”

Kubera regretted these words. Ganesha’s appetite was insatiable. He ate everything that was in the kitchen and still asked for more. Food had to be bought from the larder and then from the market. But Ganesha was still hungry.

“More please,” he said raising his trunk. Kubera had to spend all the money in his treasury and buy all the food in the world to feed Ganesha but still Ganesha was not happy. Finally, Kubera fell at Ganesha’s feet and begged him to stop, “I don’t I have enough food to satisfy your hunger. Forgive me.”

To this Ganesha said, “You really think food will satisfy hunger! The difference between you and my father is that you seek to provide more food while he seeks to reduce hunger. That is why I sit in his house and not in your kitchen.”

Ref: “Rationalising Greed: Everyone wants more” ET, 14 Jan, 2011 (http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/features/corporate-dossier/rationalising-greed-everyone-wants-more/articleshow/7279101.cms)

Bhishma’s Role

It is interesting to note how Devdutt Pattanaik evaluates Bhisma’s role vis-a-vis the ideal role during the Ramayana times:
 

1) Family more important than Kingdom for Bhisma: In the Ramayana, the kingdom of Ayodhya is more important than Raghu-kula, the family that govern it. In the Mahabharata, the Kuru-kula family is more important than the kingdom of Hastinapur it is responsible for. In the Ramayana, Ram, son of King Dashrath, upholds the tradition of the Raghu-kula, goes into exile so that the integrity of the royal family is never questioned and Ayodhya feels secure under its leadership. [u]In the Mahabharata, Bhisma, son of king Shantanu, gives up conjugal life, not for the sake of his kingdom, but so as to satisfy the lust of his father who wishes to marry Satyavati, the ambitious daughter of an ambitious fisherman.
 

2) Renouncing throne results in Dharma collapse: In the Mahabharata, like Ram, Bhisma gives up his claim to the throne for the benefit of his half-brothers. His half-brothers however do not behave like Bharat. They claim the throne. Focus of the cousins is all about inheritance rights, not royal responsibilities. Dharma collapses. Rather than share, the kingdom ends up being divided.
 

3) On Bhisma’s inability to Retire: The ashrama system of Vedic times was an attempt to ensure smooth transition to the next generation of kings while the old king was alive. After being a student, one became a Yajama or head of the household, then when the son came of age, one had to retire and finally renounce the world. This explains Dashratha’s decision to retire when Ram comes home with a wife. Bhisma, however, is never happy with the capabilities of the next generation and refuses to retire even after his grandnephews (the Pandavas and the Kauravas) have children of their own. His over-protective nature results in over-dependence upon him. No talent is nurtured and the family collapses. In the end, Bhisma has to be pinned to the ground with arrows, so that a new world order can finally be established.
 

Ref: Devdutt Pattanaik; ‘Indian corporates are looking to mythology for inspiration’, 19 Nov, 2010, Economic Times.

Ramayana: A Love Story

Ramayana can be taken in many ways, but I think it’s also a love story. It’s a love story of a prince who had to be separated from his wife when already banished from his kingdom and then he fights with evil forces and hardships to find and regain his love. When Seeta was abducted by Ravana and Ram was gathering army of monkeys and bears, at one point of time he says something like this, “They say that with passage of time our love and pain of separation calms down, but I have not felt any such relief…” How could he, when his love for Seeta was purest and divine? Rishi Valmiki describes it well. At another point, the prince says, “Whenever I see a beautiful thing, I feel how much Seeta would have enjoyed this!” And then he cries… The prince, who could move mountains and dry up oceans by his mighty arrows, cries in the memory of his beloved wife… At many places throughout Ramayana, the distressed Rama is shown to be consoled by his younger brother Lakshamana. Often Rama starts lamenting wondering how princess Seeta, his beloved wife and daughter of the great king Janaka, would be surviving amidst dreadful Rakshashis and demons. He is shown neither be hiding his feelings from his followers, nor letting his sorrow carrying him away from his righteous path. Seeta, on the other side, waits for her love every moment and spends every passing day in hope that that day would end her wait. Her love for Ram is so great and honourable that even for a moment she is not diverted.

Rishi Valmiki who was the first person to write about Rama’s story and to introduce Ramayana to this world, doesn’t mention anything about Sita’s exile to the forest after she and Ram had reunited, so we can take this for granted that once Ram restored Sita, they spent years of happy life together. As they say at the end of love stories: “And they lived happily ever after.”

After Ramayana, so many stories, poems, plays, and movies have been written and made, telling a love story in very similar lines: there are two lovers, and one villain; lovers get separated and hero fights to get back his love. In the end, they are reunited and live happily ever after… But no love story is as powerful, as divine and as elevating as the one between Ram and Seeta… It’s because Ramayana stands as a torch of light showing us the righteous way of life, and reminds us of the very high levels of moral standing that we should practice in life…

- Rahul

Lessons from Ramayana – Part 23

Reproducing a part from the book which I believe all of us should read and understand:

Now, a word to those of our times who read Raamayana and Bhaarata and other Puraanas. In these works, there are frequent references to Devas and Raakshasas. The latter were wicked, had no regard for dharma, and revelled in evil deeds. Asuras were also like Raakshasas. But even among Raakshasas there were a few wise and virtuous people. There spring up bad men even in the best of races and vice versa. On the whole, Asuras and Raakshasas were those who rejoiced in doing wicked deeds. It is a pity that some people in their ignorance identify the Asuras and Raakshasas with ancient Indian tribes and races – a view not supported by any literary work or tradition or recorded history.

The conjencture of foreigners that Raakshasas were the Dravidian race, is not borne out by any authority in Taiml or other literature. The Tamil people are not descendents of the Asuras or Raakshasas.

The Devas were generally upholders of dharma and took on themselves the task of putting down the Raakshasas. According to the Puraanas, they had at times to deviate from dharma in dealing with the Raakshasas, some of whom had attained great power through tapas.

The Devas were generally good; and those among them who swerved form the path of righteousness paid the price for it. There was no separate code of conduct for the Devas; the law of karma admits of no distinction between the Devas and others. The law dealt with the Devas as with others.

Wedded to virtue as the Devas generally were, lapses on their part appear big to us, like stains on white cloth. The Raakshasas’ evil deeds are taken for granted and do not attract much attention, like stains on black cloth.

The honest, when they happen to go astray, should evoke our sympathy. It is however the way of the world – but it is not right – to condemn in strong terms casual lapse on the virtuous, while tolerating habitual wrong-doers.

It should be noted that in the Puranas we see the gods getting entangled in dilemmas of dharma. Indra and other devas are shown often as committing serious sins. Why did the sages who told the Puranas involve themselves in such difficulties? Their aim was to awaken people to a sense of the dangers of adharma. Else, the sages need not have deliberately attributed sinful acts to their own heroes and created difficulties for themselves.

Some persons take pleasure in jumping to wrong conclusions from the incidents in the Puraanas. They argue, “Raavana was a very good king. Vaalmiki has falsely accused him of wicked deeds.” They ask: “Did not Raama act unjustly on a certain occasion? Did not Seeta utter a lie?” and the like.

Valmeeki could well have omitted incidents which are not edifying. Both Raama and Raavana were first presented to us by the poet Vaalmiki. There was no earlier work referring to Raavana that can be quoted to contradict Vaalmiki and stamp him as being partial to Raama, Seeta and the Devas, and twisting facts to deceive people. Vaalmiki’s Raamayana is the fountain source of the story of Raama; in it, one comes across seemingly wrong deeds.

Calm consideration of such situations would show that they are just portrayals of similar difficulties in our day-to-day life. It is for us to benefit from the moral trails contained in them. The lesson of the Ahalya episode is that, however deadly one’s sin, one may hope to be freed from its consequences by penitence and punishment. Instead of condemning others for their sins, we should look within our own hearts and try to purify them of every evil thought. The best of us have need for eternal vigilance, if we would escape sin.

(C. Rajagopalachari; Ramayana; Chap VIII, Ahalya; P40-42)

Lessons from Ramayana – Part 22

Fate is weird. We would never be able to understand fully, why things happened the way they happened. The author describes it in a wonderful paragraph when Kaikeyi’s mind was changed by evil minded Manthara:

And, yet, as Dasaratha told Raama, even the purest of minds is mutable. When fate conspires with bad counsel, any one of us might be corrupted. And this happened to Kaikeyi. The gods in Heaven had received an assurance, and the sages had performed tapas for the destruction of Raavana. What we call destiny, therefore, ordained that Kaikeyi’s pure heart should be changed by Manthara’s evil counsel. So says Kamban in the Tamil Raamayana in his own inimitable style.

(C. Rajagopalachari; Ramayana; Chap XII, Manthara’s evil counsel; P62)

So true…

- Rahul

Lessons from Ramayana – Part 21

Fate and Karma

Life is weird. At one point, the author describes the unfortunate end of the mighty and righteous king Dashratha:

As described by Valmeeki in the early page of the epic, Dasaratha was one who had mastered all the Vedas and Shaastras, was a farsighted person, the hero of many battles, the performer of many sacrifices, follower of dharma, a far-famed king with many friends and no foes, one who had conquered his senses. His power was like Indra’s. His wealth was like Manu. Fate had ordered that such a one should exile his beloved son and die of a broken heart, with none by him in his last moments but two faithful women stricken by himself with a common sorrow.

(C. Rajagopalachari; Ramayana; Chap XXIII, Last moments; P132-133)

Before his death, King Dashratha recalled an old happening when he had killed a young man (Shravan Kumar) by mistake and his old dependent parents had died learning this, but only after cursing the king of a similar fate. Therefore, we can understand why such an unfortunate fate descended over the righteous king…

- Rahul

Lessons from Ramayana – Part 20

When Hindus die, their children offer shraadha to them and do some rituals for the peace of the departed souls. I found reference to a similar gesture when Raama came to know about Dahsaratha’s death:

The princes, with Seeta and Sumantra went to the river and offered libations for the peace of the departed soul of the king. After other customary ceremonies, the princes returned to the cottage. They help each others’ hands and relieved their sorrow by loud lamentation.

(C. Rajagopalachari; Ramayana; Chap XXVII, The brothers meet; P169)

It means the custom is so very old.

Lessons from Ramayana – Part 19

Leaving the body when purpose is over
At two places in Ramayana, I found instances of rishis entering into fire in order to get them free from their bodies. But in both the cases, they were very sure about their purpose having finished, after years of penances and collecting strength through Yoga. The same is not applicable to people like us.

When the princes came, Sabari produced the fruits she had gathered and kept for them, and described and showed to them the wonders of the Matang aashrama. Then with their leave, she kindled a fire and entering it ascended to heaven.

(C. Rajagopalachari; Ramayana; Chap XL, Left eyelids throbe; P258)

They proceeded to the aashrama of Sarabhanga. Indra was there with other gods, talking to the rishi. Knowing that Raama had arrived, he cut short his talk and went away. Then Raama, with his brother and wife, approached the rishi and humbly saluted him.

The old ascetic said: “It is for you I have been waiting. It is time for me to leave the body but my wish was to see you first. And so I have been waiting. Now my desire is fulfilled, I pass on to you all the merit of my penances.”

Raama answered: “My Lord, should I not earn my own merit? How can I receive what you have earned? I have renounced everything to live in the forest. Advise me where I can best find an abode in the forest and send me forth with your blessing.”

The rishi knew the secret of Raama’s avatar and told him: “Learn from the sage Suteeksha where in the forest you should dwell.”

Then Sarabhanga kindled a fired and entered it. The gross body perished in the flames and a youthful ethereal form rose from the pyre and floated up the heavens.
(C. Rajagopalachari; Ramayana; Chap XXIX, Viraadha’s end; P182-183)

Lessons from Ramayana – Part 18

Ram killed the vaanara king Vaali while hiding behind a tree. He had to do so, because Vaali had got a boon from Indra which gave him power to absorb the strength of his opponent when seen in sight. Therefore Raama had no choice but to kill him while not being seen himself. Vaali as such was a good king. But he had ego and his ego made him drive his own brother Sugreeva out of his kingdom. Sugreeva wanted to redeem his honour and his wife which all Vaali had captured, without any real wrong done on the part of Sugreeva. Raama had entered into friendship with Sugreeva and promised Sugreeva to get back his kingdom and wife. Therefore, Vaali had to be killed first. Here is how the author explains this:

Owing to the protective virtue of Indra’s necklace, Raama could not have met Vaali face to face and vanquished him, just as Raavana could not be conquered by the gods. Raama could kill Vaali only when himself unseen. And still the question stands, why should Vaali have been killed at all?

Perhaps the answer is to be found in what Kabandha said to Raama in gratitude for being released from his curse. “Through Sugreeva’s friendship you will recover Seeta” – Sugreeva’s help, not Vaali’s. And so Raama went in search of Sugreeva, found him and pledged his friendship and consecrated by fire. Sugreeva had committed no unforgivable offence against Vaali; yet vaali, with his supernatural strength, persecuted his brother. Hearing the latter’s complaint, Raama had pledged his word to kill Vaali and restore to Sugreeva his wife and make him king as his part of the contract of alliance. Thereafter, Raama had no alternative. To kill Vaali from cover became an inevitable necessity.

Raama erred in running after the magic deer to please his wife. Consequent to this, difficulties and sorrows and conflicts of duty pursued him. If we keep in mind that when God takes a lower and limited form by His own ordinance, limitations follow and we should not be confused thereby. This is my humble view as against other explanations propounded by the pious.


(C. Rajagopalachari; Ramayana; Chap XLIII, The slaying of Vaali; P281)

Lessons from Ramayana – Part 17

Diversity

When Hanuman ji went to Lanka, he saw the city and its people. He also checked Raavana’s army. Ramayana describes at one place like this:

All the warriors were clad in armour. Some were handsome, some ugly; complexions varied from fair through brown to black. Some figures were very tall, others very short. Thus Hanumaan saw that the population had been drawn from a wide area with varying climates and that the army had been recruited from the pick of many nations.

(C. Rajagopalachari; Ramayana; Chap XLVIII, The search in Lanka; P317)

It is apparent that there was "diversity" in Lanka. Even in those times, they did not believe in ‘racial supremacy’ or ‘regional chauvinism’, as happens today in many parts of the world (including many states of India).

- Rahul

Lessons from Ramayana – Part 16

Wrong Path is Easier

It is often understood that the wrong path is easier, to attain a short-term goal. Students cheating in exams can pass easily, while those who rely on their own have to give in months of hard labour. One can get his work done by bribing the authorities, but the one who doesn’t give in, has to make lots of efforts in order to get what he wants. Still, there is a greater good in following the path of dharma. This message comes out from the following episode in Ramayana.

Hanuman ji went to Lanka to find the whereabouts of Sita ji. They met and Hanuman ji was to return. Then an idea came to his mind – what if he carries away Sita ji from the sky route, on his back? That would save all the efforts of Ram and Lakshaman and would even prevent a war! But Sita ji didn’t agree. This is what she said, apart from mentioning that it would be dangerous thing to do:

“Apart from that Hanumaan, if you snatch me away stealthily from the Raakshasas it would be no credit to the valour of my lord. The honour of the Kshatriya race demands that he should come and fight and vanquish Raavana and redeem me as the prize of the victory. Would Raama have me stolen back even as Raavana stole me from him? No, my son, return and quickly bring Raama here with Lakshamana and the Vaanara army. Let my lord’s arrows destroy Lanka and send Raavana to Yama’s abode. His victory is certain. Like the fierce sun at the hour of doom, Raama’s arrows will burn the Raakshasa people to ashes.”

(C. Rajagopalachari; Ramayana; Chap LIII, Seeta and Hanumaan; P353)

Lessons from Ramayana – Part 15B

If Only

There is a very interesting episode when Hanuman ji is goes to Lanka, is captured and brought in front of Ravana. What he sees, is described below:

Clad in silk of golden hue, with the royal crown on his head, the jewels inlaid in it shining brilliantly, Raavana sat there, a figure of dazzling splendour. The whole court was brilliant with shining gold and gems, pearls and silk. His dark body, lit up by the marks of royalty, looked like a great radiant hill.

“Alas!” thought Hanumaan full of anger, wonder and pity. “If only this great one had not swerved from the path of dharma, not even Indra could equal him. What a form, what radiance, what strength! Trusting to the boon he had secured, he took to wicked ways and has lost his happiness and forfeited his greatness.”
(C. Rajgopalachari; Ramayana; Chap LVII, Lanka in flames; P369)

So true… Power without righteousness or dharma corrupts us… Ravana is a symbol of how one could pull oneself so low if carried away by ego.

- Rahul