Human nature and different paths/ways for motivation and happiness/joy in life
I recently had a mail conversation with a correspondent, part of which touched upon human nature and different paths/ways for motivation/happiness in life. A slightly edited version of the exchange is shared below (with approval from the correspondent):
As the concluding part of his response a correspondent wrote:
However, human nature does not change easily.
I responded:
I entirely agree on your human nature point (does not change easily). I have elaborated on it a little below.
One of the aspects of ashram life (Sathya Sai Baba, Puttaparthi ashram) that I experienced as a free service spiritual aspirant is that one's human weaknesses (as well as strengths) comes to the fore in the small village type of environment of the ashram. And the royal battle then is with conquering, or at least subduing, one's weaknesses. [Note that now there are well paid (sixth pay commission salary scales)/reasonably well paid employees of the ashram system, some of whom may be serious spiritual aspirants but some of whom may not be so much into spirituality and may be mainly interested in the salary.]
This is where, from a Hindu perspective, the Ramayana and Mahabharata become very good teaching material especially in an ashram environment (but also in regular society environments) as the characters in it have a great mix of good and evil, human strengths and human weaknesses. Sathya Sai Baba used to frequently refer to key incidents in these epics where Rama and Krishna as well as their staunch followers/supporters like Lakshmana, Sita, Hanuman, Yudishtra, Arjuna, Draupadi etc. show how to overcome adversity and one's human weaknesses. He would also point out the key incidents showing the negative traits of the other characters like Kaikeyi+Manthara (as well as some failings of Rama's father Dasharatha), Ravana, Kauravas etc., and teach us to not fall into making the same mistakes as them. Such teachings of Sathya Sai Baba has put the Ramayana and Mahabharata epics in a significantly different and very positive light for me. It may sound very simplistic for many of us modern age people, but actually they contain the crux of the human battle over good and bad tendencies that all or most of us have.
One key learning for me from Sathya Sai Baba's teachings about Rama was that, according to him (and perhaps according to the well known versions of the epic too), Ravana was far more accomplished in scripture (Veda) than Rama. Ravana was also a great devotee of Lord Shiva and had won boons from him. So, generally speaking, Ravana was far more accomplished than Rama. The key difference between them, according to Sathya Sai Baba, was that Rama wanted to be good (was focused on being good) (and was not bothered about achieving greatness), whereas Ravana wanted to be great (from a worldly perspective). That desire for greatness led to Ravana's downfall, whereas Rama showed that he wanted only to be good (Rama declines to rule over Lanka after winning the war and prefers to go back to far more humble Ayodhya). Then Sathya Sai Baba would teach us to be good (like Rama) and not to aim for greatness (like Ravana).
[A relevant extract from Satyopanishad – Upanishad Of Sri Sathya Sai – Part 6 (Questions by Prof. Anil Kumar Kamaraju),
http://vishvarupa.com/om-sathya-sai-baba/2009/10/satyopanishad-upanishad-of-sri-sathya-sai-part-6/
Question) Anil Kumar: Swami! Kindly tell us how to achieve greatness in life?
Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba: Never allow this sort of idea to get into your head. You are mistaken if you think that you have achieved something very special and unique by becoming great. No, not at all. Becoming great in life should not be your aim. There are several great people in society. I don’t think this is important or that this matters most. Goodness is superior to greatness. Instead of aiming to be great, try to be good. It is far more important to be a good man than a great man.
What is the difference between the two? A great man sees man in God, while a good man sees God in man. Ravana, as portrayed in the Ramayana, was undoubtedly a great man. He considered Rama, the Lord, a mere man. But, Rama was an ideal good man. Rama saw divinity in a bird like Jatayu, in squirrels, and even in rakshasas like Vibhishana. Women like Sabari, illiterate people like Guha as well as saints appear to Rama like his own reflections. So, Rama was good. So, you should try to get the reputation that you are a good man and not a great man.
--- end extract from Satyopanisad ---]
From a spiritual point of view I think that is a very valuable and very effective teaching of Swami. I have benefited greatly from it. However, from a material point of view, such attitudes in today's competitive world may result in one being characterised (rightly) as lacking (material) ambition. That's what happened to me during the last decade or so of my software industry career (from around 1992-93 to Aug. 2002) when I had turned strongly towards the spiritual path. But I was OK with it as I still made enough money to take care of my responsibilities & needs.
On another comparison note, I wonder whether you were fond of Agatha Christie's books. I was very fond of them. While I enjoyed the Hercule Poirot ones more as a youngster, over time I realized that the Miss Marple ones were more educative and insightful about human nature, which is so similar in its core aspects, whether it be Agatha Christie's UK village(s) of the early 20th century (I guess) or Puttaparthi village (now town) in the early 21st century :).
The correspondent responded:
In my kind of life, competition is important to get the best out of oneself. Often, the competition is with oneself, sometimes with people you do not know and may never meet.
Since I run a bit, I enter races where there may be hundreds or thousands of others. I am not trying to be among the first few (or the first many) but I always try and improve on my timing for that kind of race. During the course of the race, I set small goals (like overtaking the guy with a grey shirt, or not drinking water until I have reached the top of the climb).
A lot of my life has been like this. Each year, I try and improve on my lectures to a class (and sometimes fail miserably), or write a research paper that gets many citations, or a newspaper article that people will talk about. I find it helps me improve whatever it is I am doing and it has its own rewards (sometimes rewards that no-one else will even notice).
I can envisage a life removed from all this but, for me, I worry that I will fail to realise what I am capable of. Of course, I am talking about material things but I wonder if I would not keep trying to do better whatever it is I was doing.
I wrote back:
I think I understand the competition part, especially the competition with one's past records/performances, as a means to improve oneself (materially). My view is that the efforts made to improve one's performance is good even from a spiritual perspective. IMHO, where it lands into some spiritually undesirable territory is when one has a strong desire for improved performance as then one becomes unhappy if that desire is not achieved/satisfied.
What I do is to put in efforts to improve myself but try to reduce my emotional attachment to the success (or failure) of the efforts.
[This is on the lines of the message of the famous Bhagavad Gita shloka, Chapter 2, Verse 47 related to activity/work (in the world) - Karmenyeva Adhikaraste Maa phaleshu kadachana ..., as interpreted by Sathya Sai Baba. Please note that, IMHO, the text below, which would have been translated from Telugu to English, uses the word, happy, to indicate short-lived and perhaps shallow joy, as compared to deeper and more lasting joy(s).
From Bhagawan Sri Sathya Sai Baba's Gita Vahini, http://vahini.org/downloads/geethavahini.html#ChapterV
If you have an eye on the fruits of your actions, you are liable to be affected by worry, anxiety and restlessness. The question may arise: if the fruits have to be given up, how can one manage to live? But why this weakness of heart, this nervousness? He who has assured, 'Yogakshemam vahamyaham,' will certainly look after that. He will give the wherewithal and the means. All you have to consider is (whether) a happy life is important or is liberation from the cycle of life and death more important? Happy living is only of short duration; the joy of liberation is eternal, unshakable.
On this point many commentators have exercised their intelligence and written differently. Many have said that the giving up of Phala or fruit is advised because there is no right or authority for the doer to desire for the fruit.
This is a great blunder. The Lord has said in the Geetha, 'refuse the fruit' (maa phaleshu), that is to say: the deed yields results, but the doer should not desire the result, or do it with the result in view. If Krishna's intention was to say that the doer has no right for the fruit, He would have said, 'It is fruitless', 'na phaleshu,' (na, meaning no). So if you desist from Karma, you will be transgressing the Lord's command. That will be a serious mistake.
When man has a right for engaging in Karma, he has a right also for the fruit; no one can deny this or refuse his right. But the doer can, out of his own free will and determination, refuse to be affected by the result, whether favourable or unfavourable. The Geetha shows the way: "Do... and deny the consequence." The desire for the result of your action is a sign of Rajoguna: the giving up of action since you cannot benefit by the fruit is a sign of Thamoguna. To engage oneself in Karma, to know that the result will follow; and yet not to be attached to it or getting concerned with it - that is the sign of Sathwaguna.
The Karmayogi who has learnt this secret of "Karma combined with Phalathyaga" should have Samabuddhi, more than Sangabuddhi. For the Sangabuddhi draws him into attachments and entanglements. "This Karma is mine; its results are due to my endeavours. I am the person entitled to it," such are the thoughts which bind the doer. Krishna advises that one should rise above this Sangabuddhi. He declares that Samathwam is the genuine Yoga. (Samathwam yogamuchyathe).
--- end Bhagawan Sri Sathya Sai Baba's Gita Vahini extract ---]
That (reducing my emotional attachment to success (or failure) of my efforts) has helped me become more contented. But I must also acknowledge that such reduction of attachment to/desire for material success has lessened my level of material success/performance, as compared to earlier days when I was not so much into such spiritual practices/stuff. However, for me now, the most important thing is being in a state of love, peace and/or joy as far as possible (and to try to spread that to others when feasible/receptive), and from that spiritual goal point of view, I think I am more successful than my earlier more-material days.
The correspondent responded:
The big danger for me is to enter what people call 'a comfort zone' and stop trying. I do much better, physically and mentally, when I feel there are challenges. I am mentally better composed, far less liable to be upset or angry, when I try and push myself a little more physically: to run a little further, or faster, to exercise a little more. I am sure there is a physical effect on my body that makes my mind more relaxed.
It's well known that exercises like running produce a burst of endorphins which give a feeling of well being. Perhaps the same effect is produced in different ways with yoga when done properly.
It's also well known that limits are what one accepts, rather than what one is capable of. There is always a little more that one can do ...
None of this is a reflection on what you said in your messages. It's the way I get motivated.
I wrote back:
Very interesting.
I think there is a huge variety in attitudes and interests in life, and so there are a lot of different paths/ways for motivation and happiness in life. One needs to explore these paths/ways and get to know what is best suitable for one. Perhaps many times it is a combination of elements of different paths.
In this context, I think it is appropriate to mention the three major paths/ways of life expounded by Hindu philosophy: Karma (action/work), Bhakti (devotion) and Jnana (knowledge/wisdom). As I understand it, these are the major categorizations but they certainly are not mutually exclusive. So Hindu believers would typically be following some mix of these three paths. However, the dominant element at a particular stage in one's life, may be one of these three.
What you have written about seems to be in line with most of the Karma marg (path) approach, which is what well-intentioned and active members of society are comfortable with. The specifics you provide regarding a 'comfort zone' leading to a person not trying to improve/excel, and the need for challenges to keep one motivated and happy (feeling of well being) are interesting, and may be the experience of some people following the Karma marg too.
Of course, faith in God is an important aspect of the Hindu Karma marg, and so it differs in that important aspect from an atheist's/agnostic's approach to an active and challenging material life. The Karma marg person is advised to do his/her actions as a humble devotional offering to God and treat the results of the actions as the will of God. That perhaps provides mental balance to handle success and failure with some degree of equanimity, even when one is deeply involved in an active material life.
The vast majority of Hindus, especially the family based ones (grihastas), seem to be following a path having a mix of Karma and Bhakti. Their devotion to God is of the type that praises God, thanks God for His gifts, asks for worldly help from God to assist them in their material lives (a lot of the Karma Kanda (ritual part) of the Vedas deals with praying for such specific worldly help from God), and also earnestly requests, usually towards the end of one's life or at times of great physical and mental suffering, spiritual refuge. But it is this grihastas group that reveres and helps saints and fosters spiritual ashrams as well as spiritual aspirants, as they believe that such attitudes and actions will be of material as well as spiritual benefit to them. So this grihastas group is a very vital part of the Hindu system. Also it is from these grihastas that some become deeply attracted to spirituality and become attached to spiritual gurus and/or become members of spiritual ashrams.
When followed with a lot of intensity, the Bhakti and Jnana paths, I think are more suitable to detached other-worldly type of people who do not give much importance to material success and are more concerned about their spiritual success/progress. Very interestingly, most mystics fall into this category. But the movements some of them initiate needs missionary kind-of active workers to spread the teachings and demonstrate its practice! So that's where Karma margam people become vital even for spiritual missions. [In this context, I think Ramakrishna was the mystic deeply into Bhakti while his disciple Vivekananda was the Karma marg type.]
BTW the Sathya Sai Puttaparthi setup (at least since I came to Puttaparthi in late 2002) is heavily into action oriented (Karma) path towards God. In this setup, the heavily quoted teaching of Swami is, "Hands that help are holier than lips that pray". People like me who are more into Bhakti and Jnana are exceptions. But my impression, based on my experience of some Maharashtra Sathya Sai samithis (devotee groups), is that the Sathya Sai samithis spread over India (a large fraternity) have a decent mix of people from Karma, Bhakti and Jnana paths.
As far as my understanding goes, many Hindu spiritual setups broadly have two main divisions:
a) The Math/Mutt: This is the seminary type part of the spiritual setup. Here, I believe, the Jnana and Bhakti margam types are dominant. This group is not so visible to the public at large, though its top leader being the public face of the Math/Mutt may be well known. I mean, a person needs to go to such centres and locate people from the group, some of whom may be very reclusive and even avoid general outside contact. [The leader would be accessible to the public during public functions in some limited way.]
b) The Service Mission: This is usually the more well known part of the spiritual setup as it interacts with the public at large through its service activities in spheres of education (secular and spiritual including teachings of the founder), medical service, welfare activities for the poor including food, clothing, and even shelter at times, disaster relief etc. In terms of number of people involved, this service mission part of the setup is typically far bigger than the math/mutt part.
As the concluding part of his response a correspondent wrote:
However, human nature does not change easily.
I responded:
I entirely agree on your human nature point (does not change easily). I have elaborated on it a little below.
One of the aspects of ashram life (Sathya Sai Baba, Puttaparthi ashram) that I experienced as a free service spiritual aspirant is that one's human weaknesses (as well as strengths) comes to the fore in the small village type of environment of the ashram. And the royal battle then is with conquering, or at least subduing, one's weaknesses. [Note that now there are well paid (sixth pay commission salary scales)/reasonably well paid employees of the ashram system, some of whom may be serious spiritual aspirants but some of whom may not be so much into spirituality and may be mainly interested in the salary.]
This is where, from a Hindu perspective, the Ramayana and Mahabharata become very good teaching material especially in an ashram environment (but also in regular society environments) as the characters in it have a great mix of good and evil, human strengths and human weaknesses. Sathya Sai Baba used to frequently refer to key incidents in these epics where Rama and Krishna as well as their staunch followers/supporters like Lakshmana, Sita, Hanuman, Yudishtra, Arjuna, Draupadi etc. show how to overcome adversity and one's human weaknesses. He would also point out the key incidents showing the negative traits of the other characters like Kaikeyi+Manthara (as well as some failings of Rama's father Dasharatha), Ravana, Kauravas etc., and teach us to not fall into making the same mistakes as them. Such teachings of Sathya Sai Baba has put the Ramayana and Mahabharata epics in a significantly different and very positive light for me. It may sound very simplistic for many of us modern age people, but actually they contain the crux of the human battle over good and bad tendencies that all or most of us have.
One key learning for me from Sathya Sai Baba's teachings about Rama was that, according to him (and perhaps according to the well known versions of the epic too), Ravana was far more accomplished in scripture (Veda) than Rama. Ravana was also a great devotee of Lord Shiva and had won boons from him. So, generally speaking, Ravana was far more accomplished than Rama. The key difference between them, according to Sathya Sai Baba, was that Rama wanted to be good (was focused on being good) (and was not bothered about achieving greatness), whereas Ravana wanted to be great (from a worldly perspective). That desire for greatness led to Ravana's downfall, whereas Rama showed that he wanted only to be good (Rama declines to rule over Lanka after winning the war and prefers to go back to far more humble Ayodhya). Then Sathya Sai Baba would teach us to be good (like Rama) and not to aim for greatness (like Ravana).
[A relevant extract from Satyopanishad – Upanishad Of Sri Sathya Sai – Part 6 (Questions by Prof. Anil Kumar Kamaraju),
http://vishvarupa.com/om-sathya-sai-baba/2009/10/satyopanishad-upanishad-of-sri-sathya-sai-part-6/
Question) Anil Kumar: Swami! Kindly tell us how to achieve greatness in life?
Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba: Never allow this sort of idea to get into your head. You are mistaken if you think that you have achieved something very special and unique by becoming great. No, not at all. Becoming great in life should not be your aim. There are several great people in society. I don’t think this is important or that this matters most. Goodness is superior to greatness. Instead of aiming to be great, try to be good. It is far more important to be a good man than a great man.
What is the difference between the two? A great man sees man in God, while a good man sees God in man. Ravana, as portrayed in the Ramayana, was undoubtedly a great man. He considered Rama, the Lord, a mere man. But, Rama was an ideal good man. Rama saw divinity in a bird like Jatayu, in squirrels, and even in rakshasas like Vibhishana. Women like Sabari, illiterate people like Guha as well as saints appear to Rama like his own reflections. So, Rama was good. So, you should try to get the reputation that you are a good man and not a great man.
--- end extract from Satyopanisad ---]
From a spiritual point of view I think that is a very valuable and very effective teaching of Swami. I have benefited greatly from it. However, from a material point of view, such attitudes in today's competitive world may result in one being characterised (rightly) as lacking (material) ambition. That's what happened to me during the last decade or so of my software industry career (from around 1992-93 to Aug. 2002) when I had turned strongly towards the spiritual path. But I was OK with it as I still made enough money to take care of my responsibilities & needs.
On another comparison note, I wonder whether you were fond of Agatha Christie's books. I was very fond of them. While I enjoyed the Hercule Poirot ones more as a youngster, over time I realized that the Miss Marple ones were more educative and insightful about human nature, which is so similar in its core aspects, whether it be Agatha Christie's UK village(s) of the early 20th century (I guess) or Puttaparthi village (now town) in the early 21st century :).
The correspondent responded:
In my kind of life, competition is important to get the best out of oneself. Often, the competition is with oneself, sometimes with people you do not know and may never meet.
Since I run a bit, I enter races where there may be hundreds or thousands of others. I am not trying to be among the first few (or the first many) but I always try and improve on my timing for that kind of race. During the course of the race, I set small goals (like overtaking the guy with a grey shirt, or not drinking water until I have reached the top of the climb).
A lot of my life has been like this. Each year, I try and improve on my lectures to a class (and sometimes fail miserably), or write a research paper that gets many citations, or a newspaper article that people will talk about. I find it helps me improve whatever it is I am doing and it has its own rewards (sometimes rewards that no-one else will even notice).
I can envisage a life removed from all this but, for me, I worry that I will fail to realise what I am capable of. Of course, I am talking about material things but I wonder if I would not keep trying to do better whatever it is I was doing.
I wrote back:
I think I understand the competition part, especially the competition with one's past records/performances, as a means to improve oneself (materially). My view is that the efforts made to improve one's performance is good even from a spiritual perspective. IMHO, where it lands into some spiritually undesirable territory is when one has a strong desire for improved performance as then one becomes unhappy if that desire is not achieved/satisfied.
What I do is to put in efforts to improve myself but try to reduce my emotional attachment to the success (or failure) of the efforts.
[This is on the lines of the message of the famous Bhagavad Gita shloka, Chapter 2, Verse 47 related to activity/work (in the world) - Karmenyeva Adhikaraste Maa phaleshu kadachana ..., as interpreted by Sathya Sai Baba. Please note that, IMHO, the text below, which would have been translated from Telugu to English, uses the word, happy, to indicate short-lived and perhaps shallow joy, as compared to deeper and more lasting joy(s).
From Bhagawan Sri Sathya Sai Baba's Gita Vahini, http://vahini.org/downloads/geethavahini.html#ChapterV
If you have an eye on the fruits of your actions, you are liable to be affected by worry, anxiety and restlessness. The question may arise: if the fruits have to be given up, how can one manage to live? But why this weakness of heart, this nervousness? He who has assured, 'Yogakshemam vahamyaham,' will certainly look after that. He will give the wherewithal and the means. All you have to consider is (whether) a happy life is important or is liberation from the cycle of life and death more important? Happy living is only of short duration; the joy of liberation is eternal, unshakable.
On this point many commentators have exercised their intelligence and written differently. Many have said that the giving up of Phala or fruit is advised because there is no right or authority for the doer to desire for the fruit.
This is a great blunder. The Lord has said in the Geetha, 'refuse the fruit' (maa phaleshu), that is to say: the deed yields results, but the doer should not desire the result, or do it with the result in view. If Krishna's intention was to say that the doer has no right for the fruit, He would have said, 'It is fruitless', 'na phaleshu,' (na, meaning no). So if you desist from Karma, you will be transgressing the Lord's command. That will be a serious mistake.
When man has a right for engaging in Karma, he has a right also for the fruit; no one can deny this or refuse his right. But the doer can, out of his own free will and determination, refuse to be affected by the result, whether favourable or unfavourable. The Geetha shows the way: "Do... and deny the consequence." The desire for the result of your action is a sign of Rajoguna: the giving up of action since you cannot benefit by the fruit is a sign of Thamoguna. To engage oneself in Karma, to know that the result will follow; and yet not to be attached to it or getting concerned with it - that is the sign of Sathwaguna.
The Karmayogi who has learnt this secret of "Karma combined with Phalathyaga" should have Samabuddhi, more than Sangabuddhi. For the Sangabuddhi draws him into attachments and entanglements. "This Karma is mine; its results are due to my endeavours. I am the person entitled to it," such are the thoughts which bind the doer. Krishna advises that one should rise above this Sangabuddhi. He declares that Samathwam is the genuine Yoga. (Samathwam yogamuchyathe).
--- end Bhagawan Sri Sathya Sai Baba's Gita Vahini extract ---]
That (reducing my emotional attachment to success (or failure) of my efforts) has helped me become more contented. But I must also acknowledge that such reduction of attachment to/desire for material success has lessened my level of material success/performance, as compared to earlier days when I was not so much into such spiritual practices/stuff. However, for me now, the most important thing is being in a state of love, peace and/or joy as far as possible (and to try to spread that to others when feasible/receptive), and from that spiritual goal point of view, I think I am more successful than my earlier more-material days.
The correspondent responded:
The big danger for me is to enter what people call 'a comfort zone' and stop trying. I do much better, physically and mentally, when I feel there are challenges. I am mentally better composed, far less liable to be upset or angry, when I try and push myself a little more physically: to run a little further, or faster, to exercise a little more. I am sure there is a physical effect on my body that makes my mind more relaxed.
It's well known that exercises like running produce a burst of endorphins which give a feeling of well being. Perhaps the same effect is produced in different ways with yoga when done properly.
It's also well known that limits are what one accepts, rather than what one is capable of. There is always a little more that one can do ...
None of this is a reflection on what you said in your messages. It's the way I get motivated.
I wrote back:
Very interesting.
I think there is a huge variety in attitudes and interests in life, and so there are a lot of different paths/ways for motivation and happiness in life. One needs to explore these paths/ways and get to know what is best suitable for one. Perhaps many times it is a combination of elements of different paths.
In this context, I think it is appropriate to mention the three major paths/ways of life expounded by Hindu philosophy: Karma (action/work), Bhakti (devotion) and Jnana (knowledge/wisdom). As I understand it, these are the major categorizations but they certainly are not mutually exclusive. So Hindu believers would typically be following some mix of these three paths. However, the dominant element at a particular stage in one's life, may be one of these three.
What you have written about seems to be in line with most of the Karma marg (path) approach, which is what well-intentioned and active members of society are comfortable with. The specifics you provide regarding a 'comfort zone' leading to a person not trying to improve/excel, and the need for challenges to keep one motivated and happy (feeling of well being) are interesting, and may be the experience of some people following the Karma marg too.
Of course, faith in God is an important aspect of the Hindu Karma marg, and so it differs in that important aspect from an atheist's/agnostic's approach to an active and challenging material life. The Karma marg person is advised to do his/her actions as a humble devotional offering to God and treat the results of the actions as the will of God. That perhaps provides mental balance to handle success and failure with some degree of equanimity, even when one is deeply involved in an active material life.
The vast majority of Hindus, especially the family based ones (grihastas), seem to be following a path having a mix of Karma and Bhakti. Their devotion to God is of the type that praises God, thanks God for His gifts, asks for worldly help from God to assist them in their material lives (a lot of the Karma Kanda (ritual part) of the Vedas deals with praying for such specific worldly help from God), and also earnestly requests, usually towards the end of one's life or at times of great physical and mental suffering, spiritual refuge. But it is this grihastas group that reveres and helps saints and fosters spiritual ashrams as well as spiritual aspirants, as they believe that such attitudes and actions will be of material as well as spiritual benefit to them. So this grihastas group is a very vital part of the Hindu system. Also it is from these grihastas that some become deeply attracted to spirituality and become attached to spiritual gurus and/or become members of spiritual ashrams.
BTW the Sathya Sai Puttaparthi setup (at least since I came to Puttaparthi in late 2002) is heavily into action oriented (Karma) path towards God. In this setup, the heavily quoted teaching of Swami is, "Hands that help are holier than lips that pray". People like me who are more into Bhakti and Jnana are exceptions. But my impression, based on my experience of some Maharashtra Sathya Sai samithis (devotee groups), is that the Sathya Sai samithis spread over India (a large fraternity) have a decent mix of people from Karma, Bhakti and Jnana paths.
As far as my understanding goes, many Hindu spiritual setups broadly have two main divisions:
a) The Math/Mutt: This is the seminary type part of the spiritual setup. Here, I believe, the Jnana and Bhakti margam types are dominant. This group is not so visible to the public at large, though its top leader being the public face of the Math/Mutt may be well known. I mean, a person needs to go to such centres and locate people from the group, some of whom may be very reclusive and even avoid general outside contact. [The leader would be accessible to the public during public functions in some limited way.]
b) The Service Mission: This is usually the more well known part of the spiritual setup as it interacts with the public at large through its service activities in spheres of education (secular and spiritual including teachings of the founder), medical service, welfare activities for the poor including food, clothing, and even shelter at times, disaster relief etc. In terms of number of people involved, this service mission part of the setup is typically far bigger than the math/mutt part.
Comments
Post a Comment