Wednesday, July 11, 2007

United Nations Talk by Jiddu Krishnamurti on Peace in Our time

Probably since the beginning of man, human beings have had no peace at all. And there have been a great many oganizations, including this organization, to bring about peace in the world, pacem in terris. But there has been no peace. For various obvious reasons: nationalism, which is glorified tribalism, various opposing religions, divisions of classes, races and so on. There have been divisions on the earth from the beginning of time: the family, the community, bigger community, the nation, and so on. And also from what one observes, religion has been one of the causes of wars. One sees the Israelis and the Arabs, the Hindus and the Muslims, the Americans and the Russians, ideas against ideas, ideologies opposing ideologies, the communist ideology and the so-called democratic ideologies. Why is it, after all these millenia upon millenia, why is it that human beings throughout the world don't live in peace? Why is it our society in which we live, whether it is the American society, the European, or Indian, or Japanese, that society has not given us peace either. That society, the culture, the tradition, is created by all human beings. We have created this society. We are responsible for this society, which is corrupt, immoral, violent, divisive, cruel and so on. We have created this, this society in which we live. We are the society.
Please the speaker is not a communist in the orthodox sense of that word. We are what we have made of the society. So we are society. That is a fact, not an exotic or stupid, irrational thought. We are society. Each one of us have made this terrible confusing, contradictory, brutal society. And until human beings, each one of us, radically transforms himself we will have perpetual wars, there will be no peace on earth. Religions have talked about it endlessly. The popes, the priests, local parish clergyman, have talked about peace. This Institution, with all its power, with its position, with its international grasp, this Institution has not brought about peace either. Forgive me for saying this, if you don't mind. And will institutions, foundations, will they ever bring peace on earth? Or it doesn't lie in that field at all - organisations or institutions, propaganda and all the rest of it? Or do we realize, each one of us, I am asking this most respectfully, do we realize that we are responsible for this? Not intellectually, or verbally, or just accepting a theory, but we are responsible for this horror that is going on in the world; every form of violence, terrorism, wars, we are responsible for it. War is not in Beirut, it is in our hearts and minds. This has been said so often, one is rather bored by all that. And we human beings seem to be incapable of living peacefully in our relationship with each other, living peacefully without any dogmatism, ideals, concepts. Because beliefs, faith, conclusions, ideals, have separated man. And man apparently has not been able to live without any of those bondages. Man is conditioned, human beings right throughout the world are conditioned. Their brains have been moulded according to a particular tradition, various forms of superstitions called religion. And is it possible for human beings wherever they live to be free of their conditioning? The conditioning as an American, as a European, Hindu and so on, is it possible for us, who are so advanced in technology, is it possible for us to radically, fundamentally, bring about psychological change? This is really a very, very serious question. This is what the biologists, bio-technologists are trying to do - trying to bring about a radical change in the very brain cells themselves so that human beings can live peacefully, not everlastingly fight each other.
So facing all this, not abstractly, as a human being, what is he to do actually? Form another group? Another religion? Another Institution? Or as a human being become aware of his conditioning? Be concerned with his conditioning and free the brain from that conditioning? Otherwise we are going to have perpetual wars, there will be no peace on earth in spite of all the religions, in spite of every institution. It must begin with us, not without somebody else out there. So is it possible to bring about a deep mutation in the very brain cells themselves? Why are human beings so conditioned - Germans, French, Russians, Italians, British, Americans, Hindus and so on, why? Is it because we want security, both external and inward? Is there such security inwardly, psychologically to be safe? Is there such security? Or psychological security is an illusion? We can go into all this in detail but our time is very, very limited.
So is there psychological security, either in the family, in a group, in a community, in a nation and internationalism and all that business? Is there any kind of security inwardly? And that is, if we are not sure about that, certain, clear, we try to seek security outwardly, externally, through nations, through religious oganizations, through some ideologies. So it is very important, it seems to one, that we should talk over together now and discover for ourselves if there is an inner security - security in our relationships with each other, however intimate it may be, between man and woman, security in community and so on. Is there security in our relationship with each other, man and woman, wife and husband? If there is security why is there such contention between man and woman, wife and husband, such conflict in their relationship, each one pursuing his own ambitions, his own fulfilments, his own desires and so on. Is it not important to find out for ourselves if there is such security in relationship. If there is such security in this then that security is the beginning of peace. If there is no security in our relationship with each other that is the beginning of conflict, war.
So we ought to really seriously enquire into this question. That is, become aware, conscious, of our relationship with each other because to go very far we must begin very near. And the nearest is man and woman, wife and husband. In that relationship there is conflict as there is now, then that conflict is spread, ultimately war. We have never given thought to this, that as our house is burning, which is society is burning, declining, degenerating, are we all so degenerating? To slide, slip down, implies our whole life is a routine, our whole life is a series of battles, struggles, conflicts. If we don't alter there, how can you bring about peace on earth. It seems to logical, so rational, sane, but we don't do that. So could we, as human beings, not as Americans and all the rest of that business, could we as human beings become aware, pay attention to our intimate relationship because unless the psychological world is quiet, sane, peaceful, that psychological state will always overcome every kind of organization, whether it be communist organization, totalitarian, or so-called democratic organization. The psyche is far more important than the external legislation, governments and so on. I wonder if one realizes all this? Do we, sitting here, peacefully, so-called peacefully, realize our responsibility as human beings? The wars that are going on in the world is our war, because our consciousness - if I can go into all this much more deeply - our human consciousness, which is made up of biological reactions, fears, hurts, pleasure, beliefs, dogmas, rituals and endless suffering, that is the content of our consciousness. If you observe this closely it is a fact that every human being throughout the world shares this, every human being suffers, every human being has fear, pleasure, sense of loneliness, despair, anxiety, confusion, every human being, whether they live in the Far East, or here, or in Russia, or in other places. We have been brought up, educated to consider ourselves as individuals. Is that so? Is that a fact? Because we share the consciousness of humanity, because we all suffer, we all go through great agonies, boredom, every form of uncertainty. You may have great talents, great capacities, but behind those capacities lies the ordinary, daily consciousness of all humanity. So each one is humanity, not separate individuals. I know you will not accept this because you have been conditioned from the beginning by religions, by society, by culture, that each one is separate individuals, separate soul. And therefore he must seek his own salvation, his own expression, his own fulfilment. And this so-called separate individuality is creating havoc in the world, which does not mean that we all become the same automatic, turned out in the same mould. On the contrary, freedom is the highest form of existence. It is the greatest art, to live freely. But we are not free. One thinks one is free to do what one likes, specially in this country, each individual thinks he is supreme to do what he wants. His own fulfilment, the expression of his own desires and so on. But if we examine closely and seriously, we share the consciousness of the entire humanity. Because this is a fact. Individuality may be an illusion. And to that illusion we are committed. But when you travel around and observe very closely, every human being, whether he has great position, great deal of money, status, power, he is like the rest of the world psychologically, he goes through great pain, desperate loneliness and all the rest of the psychological world of uncertainty, confusion. And we are the rest of humanity. We are not Africans and Europeans and all that nonsense. We are humanity. Unless we realize that one major fact in our life, we are the rest of humanity, black, white, purple or whatever colour they be, psychologically we are one. Unless human beings deeply realize that we are going to have wars, we are going to be eternally in conflict, as we are now. And no organization in the world is going to change that fact. We have had religions all over, various types of religions, Catholic and Protestant, and the division in Protestantism. There have been religions of various types in Asia. All invented by thought. And thought has made man separate because thought is the result of experience, knowledge, memory and so thought is always limited. It is never complete, it can never be complete because it is based on knowledge and knowledge is always finite, limited. It can expand, it can change but it is still within the field of knowledge. And knowledge is always limited. And we try to change the world through our knowledge. And this experiment to change the world through knowledge has never succeeded.
So what is a human being to do, if you are serious, concerned, with the world, with your own life? What is a human being to do? Form innumerable oganizations, with their bosses and their secretaries and so on? Or each one of us is responsible because we have created this society, we are responsible for every kind of war. So is it possible, not merely intellectually, but actually, in our daily life, radically to change, bring about a deep mutation? Unless we are capable of doing that we are going to have perpetual wars. No organization in the world has prevented any wars. For the last historical process there have been practically wars every year for the last five, six thousand years, all over the world. And man has been responsible for these wars. You may not have a war in America, in this part of the world, but you have wars in other parts of the world because we are divided, as Americans and Russians, and English and French and all the rest of it, not only nationally but religiously, Christians, Buddhists, Hindus. So there is this constant division, both outwardly and inwardly, it is bringing about great conflict. We are one human being, not separate. We don't seem to realize that. You suffer, you go through great anxieties, uncertainties, so does every other human being in the world. And we haven't been able to solve that basic issue, whether we can live with ourselves peacefully. Peace doesn't begin on the other side of the world, whether we live peacefully, without conflict.
And I think this is a very important question which we must put to ourselves: why is it that human beings who have lived on this earth perhaps fifty thousand years, we have done extraordinary things technologically, we have done practically nothing in our relationship with each other? We are perpetually in conflict with each other, man and woman, and this conflict is extended into war. So we are asking a most fundamental question: why do human beings who have lived on this earth for so many millenia, who have done extraordinary things technologically, who have brought about good health for people, we have done the most incredible things externally, but inwardly we are savages. Forgive me for using that word. We are fighting each other, even in our most intimate relationships. So how can one have external peace in the world, pacem in terris, if one is not peaceful in oneself? We never answer that question, we are always trying to bring changes in the outer, but we never ask of ourselves why we live this way, perpetually in conflict. It is fairly obvious when you ask that question seriously, not casually, we never spend a day trying to find out why we live this way, building a vast network of escapes from this basic fact. And we are still going on. We never seem to realize that unless each one of us fundamentally changes radically there will be no peace on earth as long as you are an American, Russian, different ideologies, different concepts, different gods, and so on, we will never have peace on this earth.
So it behoves us, and each one of us, to find out why we live this way. And whether it is possible radically to change our whole psyche. If there is not a revolution there, mere outward revolutions have very little meaning. We have had communist revolution, French revolution, other forms of revolution throughout the world and we remain what we are, self-centred, cruel and all the rest of it.
I have finished sirs.

Tuesday, July 10, 2007

Indians in a state of denial about terrorism....

Recent events that have shown albeit inconclusively the links of Indian educated doctors to a botched attempt to blow up public sites in the UK have thrown Indians all over the world into a state of denial. The response of the intellectual elite in all the countries has been to state that these are the actions of a fringe group in Islam rather than the views held by the majority. I would like to explore in some depth if our attempts to add such a spin to events is facile.

It has become the standard response of Indians as well as others in the world to react to such incidents with the same nonchalance as any other. Whether it is Hindus desecrating mosques or Muslims joining the Global Jihad, our response has been that it is the fanatical few that are bringing disrepute to the overwhelming majority. Is this really true or do we want to stay in this state of suspended disbelief for ever? None of these events would have happened in a vigilant and aware civil society.

To brush these things under the carpet by saying that these are exceptions rather than the rule brings us to a more fundamental question? Why is it that these exceptions are not caught by the civil society or the law enforcing agencies early enough in India? Is it because we will be accused of prejudice if we act fairly? Is it because our views on religion transcend the views that we hold about our country? These seem to be some of the arguments that educated Muslims seem to be putting forward to justify these actions. I cannot still understand why Muslims in India should feel a deep sense of injustice towards what is happening in Chechnya? If they interpret this as a massacre of Muslims then what should be said about the nerve gassing of Shias and Kurds by Saddam-a Muslim himself? Are we so naive that we believe this so called theory of a global conspiracy against a community?

The only solution to prevent such problems from occurring in the future is to encourage a tolerant and aware yet vigilant civil society. None of these events could have happened without atleast a few of us in the know. Unless we stand up and confront these deep seated prejudices, we will only be saying the same thing for ever. Let us change so that we can prevent a repeat of the bombings that took place in Mumbai?

Friday, July 6, 2007

The irrelevance of the Left in today's policy debate

Two recent events exposed the stark reality of the irrelevance of the Left in shaping today's policy agenda in India. The first was the protests of the left to the docking of the USS Nimitz at Chennai. The incongruity of the event and the protests of the Left demonising the docking of the ship as India's abject surrender to the US is worth a dekko. The fact that US and India are embarking on a fresh chapter in their relationship speaks volumes of the new found maturity of the nations. However the Left still seems to be caught in a time warp and doesnt want India to get too close to the US. If not the US, does the Left want India to join forces with China or an irrelevant Russia? Chinese foreign policy has always been to keep India guessing and any talk of friendship is sheer optimism. The Left parties project the Indian dependence on the West as a sign of our weakness rather than as a sign of India's strength. A majority of the Indians have no qualms with our friendship with the US and aspire to the way of life there. Why does the Left still behave hypocritically when even China has adopted capitalism as the engine for its growth?

The second event that was not very publicised was the interview with Buddhadeb Bhattacharya on IBN. The West Bengal CM clearly said that he disagreed with the views of the Leftist economists on developmental policies. Such a pragamtic articulation by one of India's best CMs should jolt the Left out of its slumber and force them to re-think their policies. But the Left still seems to believe that what is good for Bengal is not good for the rest of India. It remains to be seen whether the Indian public will finally wake up and force the dinosaurs of the Left into extinction forever.

Monday, July 2, 2007

Is the Tiger on the verge of extinction?


One of India's finest species of mammals may soon be on the road to extinction unless we act immediately. According to recent estimates by the World Wide Fund for nature, the tiger population has dropped significantly from its levels in 1995. While at the turn of the 20th century, the tiger population was estimated to be 100000 creatures, the latest figure could be anywhere between 1500-3000. What is more alarming is the drastic fall that has occurred in the last 10 years. Years of official apathy have led this magnificent creature to wage a heroic struggle for its survival.

There are many reasons for the sad state of affairs today. The encroachment of the tiger's habitat due to the pressures of an evergrowing population demanding amenities for itself has been one of the primary reasons for the disappearance of the tiger. In addition large scale poaching especially in states like Madhya Pradesh have led to a significant decline in the population of tigers. The demand for tiger skins is well known throughout the world. However what is not very well known is the increasing appetite of the Chinese population for drugs that include the bones of the tiger amongst other ingredients. This demand is fuelling a large cross border illegal trade in tiger parts. What is perplexing is the attitude of the Chinese government if recent news reports are to be believed. A Chinese official has said that the ban on tiger trade in China may be lifted as early as this year. This is despite the recommendation by the WWF against lifting such a ban.

Drastic measures are called for in this moment of crisis. A nationwide educational campaign on tiger habitats will help tribals appreciate the importance of preserving the tiger for the ecological balance of the country. In addition special areas need to be reserved for the tiger where humans may not transgress. The government must take stringent measures against poachers even if that means deploying a special task force for the time being. In addition, the government must step up diplomatic pressure on the Chinese to prevent them from lifting the ban. Only time will tell whether we will be able to do something soon enough to protect the tiger from being seen in photos and videos only in the future. Will the government take a strong position atleast on this issue?