ON ‘THE CROOKED TIMBER OF NEW INDIA’

 

On seeing the release of the book, I decided to buy it, not necessarily to read it, because I almost knew what it was about and have heard many episodes of the author’s ‘Midweek Matters’ and have had a fairly good idea about his thought process and concerns but because I knew that it will contain data and important instances quoted, which will be indeed a document on important socio-politico-economic events of the last decade.  This I anticipated because, in the episodes of the ‘Midweek matters’ I had seen that the author came out with well researched data and quotes and his expressions were not emotional, but one of deep concern.  The author could not be branded a political activist, an economist, a sociologist, journalist, etc.  But he was all of these in parts.

The very of ‘Crooked Timber’ is seen to date back to Immanuel Kant, wherein human basically held to be like a crooked timer and could not be straight, without inspection.

The author of this book perhaps believed that it was natural for the nation to become of crooked timber, if not inspected, questioned and put on the right path.  That way, the book does not disappoint.

Before I get into some of the specific issues dealt with in the book, as a prelude I should say that the book is a record of current history – to stand against propaganda material.  It speaks with facts and data.  It quotes the source of the information and data.  Hence, it is not essays, merely conveying the impressions of the author. 

 Most of the essays are those that have come out as episodes of ‘Midweek Matters’.  The essays are not important just because they are a record or make a remark over the events from 2014, but because they compile the facts and data to prove it. It supports our worst fears, looks at reasons behind or beneath it.

Now some of the observations in the book and comments wherever found necessary (which are put within brackets):

In the Introduction the author says, ‘The Modi regime is obsessed with untrammeled power to do as it pleases.  Democracy is a nuisance’.

 (No it is a vehicle for them to convince the society that they are doing everything in a democratic manner.)

He says, ‘The lofty remarks of their lordships during court hearings and in lectures outside the court rooms are rarely reflected in their judgments and orders.’

(They are also part of the system.)

Further he says, ‘The BJP chief minister of Uttar Pradesh, the largest state in our Republic, openly said that the 2021 electoral fight in his state was between 80% and 20%, thus framing the election as a fight between the Hindu majority and Muslim minority’.

 (Was it not L.K.Advani who understood and spoke about the ‘bandwagon effect’?  Then how can his followers not be expected to take full advantage of that?)

Then he has said, ‘…China continues to enjoy the fruits of its recent incursions and sit pretty on a major chunk of our territory unchallenged.  But the Prime Minister tells the nation that there was no incursion at all.  Hardly anyone calls him out.’

 (What is there to call out?  Every one, knows.  Every other day, even Subramaniam Swamy tweets about it.  But ordinary people are not bothered whether or not a blade of grass grows in the occupied territory.)

He speaks about ‘Transparency in electoral bonds scheme’.

 (Yes, they are transparent.  Collecting money in the name of the party is not corruption – when done in a legal frame work, which they alone can use.)

He laments that, ‘The government does not share information with Parliament about farmers’ suicides; or the deaths of migrant labourers during the COVID waves and the brutal lock down of 2020; or the loss of jobs due to the pandemic and the loss of lives due to lack of access to hospital beds and oxygen cylinders; or the level of unemployment in the country’.

 (How does one expect all this when they have not been able to count the notes that came back?)

He observes, ‘Between 2016 and 2019, 79% of the funds released went only into media advocacy.  A mere 21% actually went towards any concrete initiative for the education, health and welfare of girls’.

 (One should be happy that it helped those in the media to earn their bread.)

He concludes, ‘To criticize the government or the BJP is to be anti-Modi, and, therefore, anti-national, unpatriotic.’

(Something all powerful rulers right from Indira Gandhi and their supporters propagated.) 

In the chapter about the Pandemic, the author has pointed to the fact that any criticism against the government handling or mishandling the pandemic is projected as an attempt to defame Bharath.

(Yes, the same thing that was done when Domnique Lapire wrote ‘The City of Joy’.)

In the Introduction itself he has said, ‘Our democracy is in crisis, our social fabric is torn, our economy is in peril, and we are being dragged back to the dark ages’.

(But when those exercising adult franchise are more on emotional issues, how do these issues concern them?)

The book says that the dark elements that swim below in the surface are being summoned to increase animosities and cleavages that lie dormant in a stratified and diverse society like India.

The world over, right wings have resorted only to his method.  They try to instigate the animal instincts.  The leaders of earlier generations, atleast after the ‘age of reason’, had tried to make people rise up to higher levels, by overcoming their base instincts.  But, now to allow the base instincts of one set of people to play against that of other and make use of the divide is ‘Chanakya tantra’. 

The rise of the BJP and the Hindutva in India has also been helped by the twin tower blast and Mumbai and Parliament attacks.  This enabled BJP to sharpen their anti-Muslim propaganda by focusing the nature of terrorism and its’ colour.  On this aspect, the Muslim community needs to become all the more vigilant and ensure that its’ youth do not get carried away in the stream of emotions and counter emotions. 

The basic problem in any society is that whenever a group is organized, whether in the name of community, caste, ideology, language, or anything else, the others who do not belong to that group and who do not have any other group which is as much organized, start looking upon the organized group and its people with fear and envy.  The Muslim community like the Sikhs also is a well knit community with strong bonds of brotherhood.  On the other hand, the Hindu community does not have a common bond.  It is a loose-knit one, with no single prophet, no single holy book, no single philosophy or outlook and even a single way of life, to be defined.  The smaller groups within the Hindu community which are organized on lines of the caste structure, get pulled down by other caste groups.  Thus, they are not a match to the Muslim community which is organized.  The Christian community also by its different churches and interpretations of the Bible are also similarly placed.

However, those who know Islam also know that it also has different streams within and a dialogue between the different faiths is the only method to bring a lasting solution to human problem created due to different faiths. 

But, that concept of peaceful co-existence is not desired by vested interests who want to make quick money and power.

The book gives a detailed study on how the theory that Muslims will overpopulate compared to Hindus and take over India is a flawed one, based on hard statistics.  Its analysis of the Total Fertility Rate (TFR) of different communities, over a period of time is worth noting.

The book points out that connecting Hinduism to India and India to Hindi are part of the great plan. 

On reading about how the Modi government survived on propaganda, I was reminded of what a veteran told me in 2013 – that Modi was only emulating what Karunanidhi and DMK did in early 60s and 70s. 

The author states that people like Angela Merkel of Germany are living examples that self-confident and accomplished leaders and their parties do not show themselves as extraordinary and superhuman beings. 

-But, even the Germans fell for the macho man image of Hitler.  Indians are still prone to Hero worship.  They tend to depend upon one or the other avathar to come to their rescue.

The author under the chapter ‘Egocracy’, Digital Freedom and Data Privacy’ gives important inputs regarding how dangerously compromised our personal data is.  It is rightly pointed out that while Government wants data for surveillance, business requires it to make money.  He also points out that Government cannot be sole custodian to declare what is fake news.  But most of the BJP supporters will not agree with that, until BJP is out of power.

In the chapter, ‘Poverty data and data poverty’, the author points out how 108 economists and social scientists from around the globe have expressed concern over the loss of credibility of Indian economic data.  He also points out that while tech giants amass enormous amount of our personal data to manipulate our decisions and make money, Government on the other hand does not want to give access to us to it so that we are kept in the dark and confused so that political discourse is manipulated.  He concludes by saying, ‘Both the State and Capital ar working by stealth to construct and economic and political future for us – without our consent.  Both need to be combatted.’  THIS IS VERY SERIOUS AND IMPORTANT.

In the chapter,  ‘Subhas Bose and New India’s Legacy Raiders’, the author seeks to show how BJP has tried to misappropriate the legacy of Subash Bose and Patel by using them against Nehru. ‘But the New India that was announced in 2014 has concocted a folklore, which recruits Gandhiji, Patel and now Bose, along with Sarvarkar and Godse, to serve its crafty narrative of patriotism.  It is not troubled by the conflicting ideas of India these men held, as long as it can fire the gun off their shoulders at Nehru, who they believe with the persons who denied them a Hindu Rashtra and who may do so again through his continuing legacy’, says the author.

But on this I feel that either the author does not want to admit, or admit now, that it is Gandhi who is their main target.  How can a party which thrives on their majority-based claim accept that Right is might and how can they accept that Ends do not justify means?  It was and is Gandhian philosophy which stands in the way of Hindu Rashtra.  They know that in their hearts.  But do not want to say that openly until Nehru is demolished.  That is why they carry Godse on their shoulders.  The attack on Nehru is only like their propaganda against pseudo-secularism.  After it reaches the subconscious mind of the average Indian, they will go for the next step.

On the JNU culture and the students being concerned about all world affairs, the author seeks to know whether it is wrong.  Yes, in the eyes of those who think that students are supposed to think only on lines that they are taught, that discipline is a sine quo non for learning, culture of questioning is anathema.  They may, for sake of argument say that in the ancient India students questioned their masters to learn.  But that was only on the subject.  Not on morality or such things.

In the chapter on sale of PSUs and VIZAG ‘STEAL’ the author makes a very important observation that it is a myth that PSUs cannot perform and that private sector will flourish.  He gives numerous examples and data for that.

In the chapter on ‘Who killed Father Stan Swamy’, the author gives the complete history of legislations which have led to this situation and concludes that all political parties are directly and indirectly responsible for this.

In this connection, questions asked about why the Supreme Court of India convenes special hearings even on holidays when it comes to cases regarding very important persons but many are languishing in jails as under-trials, becomes very relevant. It is something very serious and needs attention of any concerned citizen.

Regarding the attitude of selective speak of the PM and how he conducted Manki Bath during the pandemic, selecting only a few who survived and not anyone who had lost their near and dear to the pandemic, I was forced to think that we should thank our stars that some family who had lost their kith or kin to the pandemic had not been brought up to thank whatever the government did, inspit of their loss ‘which was purely due to bad karma or fate’.

The present regime survives only because of people who want them to ‘teach the others a lesson’, as the author concludes in his last chapter.

This is precisely the problem.

The underlying and hidden animosity of the majority community towards the ‘others’ who are organized, is the real issue to be dealt with.

There have been in the horizon great philosophers and social activists who could rise above petty politics.  They were those who did not seek power, wealth or fame.  The nation requires such personalities, only if we should come out of the crisis.

The real problem is not what we are in today.  It is regarding how we are to come out of the hole. There is a famous adage: Every successor makes the predecessor better.  That way, we have to be wary not only about what if BJP or Modi continues after 2224, but also about whether the next incumbent, even if replacing BJP would be able to set the wheel back.

Already, many of the political parties are falling in line with Hindu appeasement.  This is the inverse of what was being done earlier – as if nothing of Hindu matters.

Between the two extremes of 'India was good for nothing until the British came' and that 'India was the Vishwaguru and everything was known to the Indians all along in human history', rationality requires to stop and think, what was known and what was not.  Then, the present position is to be assessed.  What if my grandfather knew something, but it has no relevance for my present stature – intellectual or economic or cultural.  How does past glory alone matter?

In an environment with social dis-harmony and mutual hate and suspicion between groups and communities, no economic progress can take place.  On one hand seeking foreign investments and on another hand bashing anything foreign unless it falls within our likes would be riding on two horses, without a cart.

The insightful points made by former Home Secretary G.K. Pillai in the interview with Karan Thapar is exactly on these lines.  He emphasizes that not only Hindus, but those with secular outlook in all religions have to speak out, otherwise, our next generations will be in deep trouble. 

People of other faiths have to stop their Hindu bashing – whether openly or within the confines of their closed meetings.  Hindus have to revert back to their real secular roots.

I have deliberately not covered all aspects in the book so that if anyone is interested in reading it, my observations should not stop them from that.  It is to be read and preserved.

Hope more like Parakala Prabhakar come out to stem the tide.

 

 

 

Thoughts – just like that.

 

A friend was quoting Voltaire – ‘I may not agree with whatever you say, but shall defend till death, your right to say that’.

But this tolerance is not an ordinary thing.

Khalil Gibran’s story goes like this:

“Four frogs sat upon a log that lay floating on the edge of a river. Suddenly the log was caught by the current and swept slowly down the stream. The frogs were delighted and absorbed, for never before had they sailed.

At length the first frog spoke, and said, “This is indeed a most marvellous log. It moves as if alive. No such log was ever known before.”

Then the second frog spoke, and said, “Nay, my friend, the log is like other logs, and does not move. It is the river that is walking to the sea, and carries us and the log with it.”

And the third frog spoke, and said, “It is neither the log nor the river that moves.

The moving is in our thinking. For without thought nothing moves.”

And the three frogs began to wrangle about what was really moving. The quarrel grew hotter and louder, but they could not agree.

Then they turned to the fourth frog, who up to this time had been listening attentively but holding his peace, and they asked his opinion.

And the fourth frog said, “Each of you is right, and none of you is wrong. The moving is in the log and the water and our thinking also.”

And the three frogs became very angry, for none of them was willing to admit that his was not the whole truth, and that the other two were not wholly wrong.

Then a strange thing happened. The three frogs got together and pushed the fourth frog off the log into the river.”

Intolerance is not new.

When Gandhi was killed, GB Shaw said, “It shows how dangerous it is to be good”.

What is good? Rabindranath Tagore said, “He who wants to do good, knocks at the gate; he who loves finds the gates open.”

When I first read it, I did not know how doing good was inferior. At a young age, we are taught to do good only.

Thiruvalluvar states that purity of the mind is more than anything else.

But will not going on doing good things itself make the mind pure? Does not the Gita say, go on doing your karma without thinking about the fruits?

But there is a contradiction. When we do something, we have a target. Then, how not be worried about the target itself?

It was just like I asked Swami Sachidananda when I was around 20 years old, “When you say that God cannot be perceived by the 5 senses, you are stating it by use of the 5 Senses. How can the senses say what they could not perceive?” He looked at me and said “You are young, and have not got the experience. That is why this question”. I thought it was a typical way of putting one off.

Later I came across that Ramana Maharshi explained it in a different manner – ‘Though you cannot know that you slept well while sleeping, because if you know that then, it means you did not have a sound sleep, still after waking up when asked if you slept well, you are able to confirm that.’

Then I understood what was the experience spoken about.

Same doubt I got when Thiruvalluvar says it is better to fail in an attempt to throw a spear at an elephant than to shoot down a hare. I had this question – Is it not more difficult to take aim at a hare than aiming at a huge elephant? Later only it dawned, that valour was important.

Valour is in one’s thought.

Descartes said “I think, therefore I am”.

I feel it is actually, ‘I think I am’.

Osho speaks about how a frog wondered at a centipede about how it was able to walk on its several legs. When the centipede was told this, the centipede became so conscious that it got it’s legs entangled with one another and could not move.

So it is better not to think. Then I am.

GOOD FRIDAY THOUGHTS

 

The above painting is the Isenheim Altarpiece, created in 1515 by Matthias Grünewald, a German Renaissance painter. 

Good Friday is a poignant occasion to give some thought to persecution and suffering.

Though the killing of Socrates several years before Christ is one of the most painful moments in human memory, the crucification of Christ continues to torment the human psyche by the sheer exhibition of cruelty and injustice to a person who taught his disciples passivism - to be meek like the lamb.

And till date, even in very insignificant places and instances, people still get crucified, though not necessary physically, but in many other forms.  The suffering they endure is all the same real.

The war that Socrates or Christ waged against the establishment, the need for them to ask people to ask questions, to realize the truth, etc, continue.  The reaction of the establishment also continues in different degrees according to the situation.

Everyone on such a path comes to realize that first they will have to cry out, “Why did thee forsake me”, to come to realize the real drama being played out and only thereafter they will be able to make the grand statement, “Forgive them, for they know not what they do”. 

It is not necessary that one should oneself go through the turmoil, to understand the pain and the process of reinventing or resurrecting. 

One can feel it if associated with it with real empathy.

There are instances of Sisters bleeding like Christ on the Cross. Paramahansa Yogananda speaks about meeting Sister Terese, who is one such person and the other being Sister Elena Aiello whose beautification was done in 2011.

There might be skeptics who could question these incidents wherein the condition is known as the Stigmata. 

However, the saivaites strongly believe that Lord Siva came to work for an old lady who had absolute faith in him and when the Pandya King inflicted some thrashes on the worker who was the manifestation of the Lord, it was felt by all and the marks were seen on all beings.

The Vaishnavites also tell several stories where the punishment inflicted on the bakthas of Vishnu or Krishna were seen on the deities themselves.

In the century that went by, we have come across the episode where Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa was seen intently meditating on a bull that was very far away and when the owner of the bull gave it a whipping, Sri Ramakrishna smarted in pain and on his back there was a reddish mark showing a whip lash.  It was called a psychic wound.

We also come across another instance when an Americal journalist Vincent Shean is said to have experienced such a psychic wound when he was in the spot when Gandhi ji was shot dead, though he was not anywhere near where any real bullet particles could have pierced.  He himself narrates it in his book, Lead Kindly Light.

Dr. V.S. Ramachandran, the world renowned Indian born Neuroscientist states in his book, The Tell-Tale Brain that there are ‘mirror neurons’ in the brain that are capable of getting the experience of another body.  He says that it is these neurons that enable culture to build based on experience and empathy and this is the greatest possibility by which evolution takes place.  However, in order to block all such experience from being mixed up as one’s own or other’s, there are certain cells in the skin. 

There is a misconception that those who empathize with the pain and suffering of others are communists.  No, they are only human beings.  Others, perhaps are thick skinned.

On this Good Friday, let us mediate on the millions of sufferings still being faced by multitudes around the globe, day in and day out, absolutely for no fault of theirs and even for being right and earnest.

For their betterment, let us await for the resurrection of the spirit.

Opportunity provided by Rahul to save Democracy

 

There is a discussion going on regarding whether #Rahul is paying up for his past karma in having thrashed an amendment to the #RepresentationofPeoplesAct, sought to be brought in by his own Government to side step a judgment by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of #LilyThomas.

The relevant Section of the said Act is reproduced below:

8. Disqualification on conviction for certain offences. —

(1) A person convicted of an offence punishable under—

(a) section 153A (offence of promoting enmity between different groups on ground of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony) or section 171E (offence of bribery) or section 171F (offence of undue influence or personation at an election) or sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of section 376 or section 376A or section 376B or section 376C or section 376D (offences relating to rape) or section 498A (offence of cruelty towards a woman by husband or relative of a husband) or sub-section (2) or sub-section (3) of section 505 (offence of making statement creating or promoting enmity, hatred or ill-will between classes or offence relating to such statement in any place of worship or in any assembly engaged in the performance of religious worship or religious ceremonies) of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860); or

(b) the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955 (22 of 1955) which provides for punishment for the preaching and practice of "untouchability", and for the enforcement of any disability arising therefrom; or

(c) section 11 (offence of importing or exporting prohibited goods) of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962); or

(d) sections 10 to 12 (offence of being a member of an association declared unlawful, offence relating to dealing with funds of an unlawful association or offence relating to contravention of an order made in respect of a notified place) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (37 of 1967); or

(e) the Foreign Exchange (Regulation) Act, 1973 (46 of 1973); or

(f) the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985); or

(g) section 3 (offence of committing terrorist acts) or section 4 (offence of committing disruptive activities) of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (28 of 1987); or

(h) section 7 (offence of contravention of the provisions of sections 3 to 6) of the Religious Institutions (Prevention of Misuse) Act, 1988 (41 of 1988); or

(i) section 125 (offence of promoting enmity between classes in connection with the election) or section 135 (offence of removal of ballot papers from polling stations) or section 135A (offence of booth capturing) of clause (a) of sub-section (2) of section 136 (offence of fraudulently defacing or fraudulently destroying any nomination paper) of this Act; 1 [or]

(j) section 6 (offence of conversion of a place of worship) of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991;] 2 [or

(k) section 2 (offence of insulting the Indian National Flag or the Constitution of India) or section 3 (offence of preventing singing of National Anthem) of the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971 (69 of 1971),] 4 ; or

(l) the Commission of Sati (Prevention) Act, 1987 (3 of 1988); or

(m) the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (49 of 1988); or

(n) the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 (15 of 2002),] 5

shall be disqualified, where the convicted person is sentenced to—

(i)            only fine, for a period of six years from the date of such conviction;

(ii)          imprisonment, from the date of such conviction and shall continue to be disqualified for a further period of six years since his release.]

(2) A person convicted for the contravention of—

(a) any law providing for the prevention of hoarding or profiteering; or

(b) any law relating to the adulteration of food or drugs; or

(c) any provisions of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (28 of 1961);6 *** 6 * * * * *

(3) A person convicted of any offence and sentenced to imprisonment for not less than two years [other than any offence referred to in sub-section (1) or sub-section (2)] shall be disqualified from the date of such conviction and shall continue to be disqualified for a further period of six years since his release.]

(4)] Notwithstanding anything 8 [in sub-section (1), sub-section (2) or sub-section (3)] a disqualification under either subsection shall not, in the case of a person who on the date of the conviction is a member of Parliament or the Legislature of a State, take effect until three months have elapsed from that date or, if within that period an appeal or application for revision is brought in respect of the conviction or the sentence, until that appeal or application is disposed of by the court.

It is the Sub Section 4 of the Section 8 above which was struck down by the Apex Court in Lily Thomas Case.

A brief about the case and its fall out is given in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disqualification_of_convicted_representatives_in_India

The moot point here is whether persons convicted for offences, heinous as could be seen from the list given in Section 8 of the Representation of Peoples Act, could be sought to be allowed to be Law Makers by a Parliamentary Legislation. 

Whether defamation is to be a criminal case or should be only a civil case as in most of the developed countries is another point. In fact people like #Dr.SubramaniamSwamy who were all for decriminalising defamation are strangely keeping quiet now.

Questions on legal and moral matters should not be approached with what is presently favourably in mind.

In that aspect, we have to give respects to Rahul for his stand when his party headed Government sought to make the amendment to overcome the Lily Thomas verdict.

This is what he is said to have stated:

“What the Congress has done and what our government has done is wrong. People will give you political lines, but I will tell you what I personally feel about this ordinance. It is complete nonsense and should be torn apart and thrown away.”

Though Rahul never personally tore up the ordinance (as it widely said), he said trashing the ordinance “In my organisation, arguments were made that we need this ordinance because of political considerations and everyone does this - the BJP, Congress, JDU and the SP. It is time to stop this nonsense.” reports The Tribune -https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/nation/the-ordinance-rahul-gandhi-trashed-could-have-saved-him-490950

While there is every chance that Political parties would use every legal method to get their opponent party members disqualified or to create charges against them to make them join their own ranks, and even though we are seeing such episodes in rampant, to allow criminals to be law makers will not be a pleasant dispensation.

The other question that comes is whether someone could be held a criminal until they have exhausted all their appellate remedies.  From the point of view of human rights, it is correct.  But in public service, where people cannot be allowed to use their office even to subvert the process of law, it is dangerous to keep people having a case against them in positions where they can influence the decision making process.

It could be a suspension that could be resorted to when one such accused is a Government Servant.  But in representation of a constituency, such suspension and for very long time would practically have problems for the people being represented.

Now, that brings us to another point: Are the people being represented by the elected representatives or by their parties?

Obviously, it is the parties that are representing the people.  This got reinforced after the anti-defection law.

Again, whether a person holding a Public Office, elected from some other constituency could go for campaign in another constituency even while he or she enjoys the post and the expenditure which will not be counted against the expenditure of the candidate?

How far are these really helping the process of representation of the people through their representatives?

These are only some of the questions which have to come into our consciousness and for which the present generation has to find answers and methods for, if democracy has to survive in it’s true spirit.

We should thank Rahul for this opportunity.

 

 

The Young Monk of Socialism

 

If we were to think about a quintessential organisational man with his heart beating for the deprived and intellect facing any challenge, it was the young monk of India Swami Vivekananda.

It is however a tragedy in Indian History that the Socialists did not use him enough in their path of building their ideals in this country and as a result have allowed him to be mis-appropriated by bigots, whose very methods and thinking was opposed to his. Quoting him partly and at random and as per convenience, and portraying him in the ochre robes has suited some who want to give a totally distorted view of what he really stood for.

Today is his birthday.

The following is a quote from a speech 'My Plan of Campaign' delivered by him at Madras.

The action plan laid down by him is true for any persons desirous of building an organistation, a society, a nation and even in leading his own personal life.

This is the vision which has go into every conscious human being :

"They talk of patriotism. I believe in patriotism, and I also have my own ideal of patriotism. Three things are necessary for great achievements. First, feel from the heart. What is in the intellect or reason? It goes a few steps and there it stops. But through the heart comes inspiration. Love opens the most impossible gates; love is the gate to all the secrets of the universe. Feel, therefore, my would-be reformers, my would-be patriots! Do you feel? Do you feel that millions and millions of the descendants of gods and of sages have become next-door neighbours to brutes? Do you feel that millions are starving today, and millions have been starving for ages? Do you feel that ignorance has come over the land as a dark cloud? Does it make you restless? Does it make you sleepless? Has it gone into your blood, coursing through your veins, becoming consonant with your heartbeats? Has it made you almost mad? Are you seized with that one idea of the misery of ruin, and have you forgotten all about your name, your fame, your wives, your children, your property, even your own bodies? Have you done that? That is the first step to become a patriot, the very first step. I did not go to America, as most of you know, for the Parliament of Religions, but this demon of a feeling was in me and within my soul. I travelled twelve years all over India, finding no way to work for my countrymen, and that is why I went to America. Most of you know that, who knew me then. Who cared about this Parliament of Religions? Here was my own flesh and blood sinking every day, and who cared for them? This was my first step.

You may feel, then; but instead of spending your energies in frothy talk, have you found any way out, any practical solution, some help instead of condemnation, some sweet words to soothe their miseries, to bring them out of this living death?

Yet that is not all. Have you got the will to surmount mountain-high obstructions? If the whole world stands against you sword in hand, would you still dare to do what you think is right? If your wives and children are against you, if all your money goes, your name dies, your wealth vanishes, would you still stick to it? Would you still pursue it and go on steadily towards your own goal? As the great King Bhartrihari says, "Let the sages blame or let them praise; let the goddess of fortune come or let her go wherever she likes; let death come today, or let it come in hundreds of years; he indeed is the steady man who does not move one inch from the way of truth." Have you got that steadfastness? If you have these three things, each one of you will work miracles. You need not write in the newspapers, you need not go about lecturing; your very face will shine. If you live in a cave, your thoughts will permeate even through the rock walls, will go vibrating all over the world for hundreds of years, maybe, until they will fasten on to some brain and work out there. Such is the power of thought, of sincerity, and of purity of purpose."

Perceiving something is intellectual.  Feeling something is becoming conscious. There is a lot of difference.  

As long as we confront problems with our minds, we will be only playing an intellectual game.  One could claim to be detached and disinterested.

But when one feels, the gate opens. The solution emerges.

There lies the key.