Review - A Trojan Horse... (The Hindu, 23/06/2026)

A friend of mine from the IITD faculty asked me to analyse and comment on the above article. I went through this article line by line. Here are my observations on the article and otherwise. I hope this will enlighten you. 

Probable Objectives of Such Articles.

1)    Sometimes the objective of such articles is to create political noise, and sometimes, the still deeper objective is to create civilizational aberrations. One should keep in mind the objective of these articles while judging them.

2)   It is quite possible that the author has a particular inclination and, being uncomfortable with a certain turn of events, may have genuinely raised the issue. But the reader should be careful to separate facts from opinions and find out if the article is sharing facts or promoting opinions.

3)  Sometimes, these articles are not written for critical thinkers, or for the people who are already convinced otherwise, but the hidden objective of the article is to retain people in its folds, if possible, to pull some of the fence-sitters to its folds, or to create doubt in the minds of the people belonging to the opposite camp. This is done to preserve or promote a vote bank, which ultimately determines the direction and fate of democracies.

4)   The world is always engaged in civilizational or economic wars, and such articles are part of psychological warfare that is deployed during peacetime as well as wars.

5)   Nevertheless, such articles may also be a genuine attempt to bring up the problems in the system before the people.

The Nature of Such Articles:

1)   This is not a scientific article and, like any non-scientific article, it is highly opinionated.  Many statements made in this article are the opinion of the author, which he has considered as true and conveniently skipped to substantiate with data or analysis.

2)   Since non-scientific articles are based on opinions, it is always possible to reach an opposite conclusion by using selective examples and by assigning an opposite opinion to them. For example, while integrating the traditional knowledge with current knowledge, the author may opine that it is backward and a waste of time or say that it will strengthen the knowledge system and make it comprehensive without substantiating it.

3)   Unlike scientific problems, human systems are a mix of good and bad. It is possible to twist the same article to an opposite conclusion by being selective and highlighting only one side of the issue.

A similar article with an opposite conclusion can be written on the same topic. It depends on which way the money is flowing.

Credibility and Competence of the Author:

1)   While reviewing this article, we also need to investigate the Credibility and Competence of the author. Is Vasudevan conversant with IKS, the IIT system, and the scientific temperament of the IIT faculty and competent to comment on them? It is possible that he has written an unbiased article as per his conscience. Maybe the author is compelled by his ideological orientation or attraction to money to reach a particular conclusion.

2)  The reader must know the history of the author to evaluate his article. As this is a non-scientific article, its tone and conclusions depend heavily on the inclinations and motives of the author.

Credibility of the Media - The Hindu:

1)   Of all the newspapers, ‘The Hindu’ is not an objective paper. It is a highly polarised and anti-Hindu paper. It is well known that ‘The Hindu’ paper is driven by agenda, ideology, and perhaps monetary considerations as well. To expect objectivity and rationality from ‘The Hindu’ is asking for too much. All that ‘The Hindu’ writes must be verified critically. Therefore, the first objection to this article is that the credibility of the newspaper which has published this paper is seriously in doubt.

We can’t expect truth from a politically driven newspaper.

Comments on the Contents of the Article:

1)   Coming to the text of the article, the author only briefly supports the idea of IKS (Col.-1, Para-1), just to show his unbiasedness, but soon follows an ideological path.

2)  Col.-1 Para-2: He is suggesting that “IKS might focus on linguistics of Panini, the Nyaya school of logic, the Kerala school of mathematics, the development of Wootz steel, and so on.” 

a) He is missing many domains of IKS, such as Veda, Upanishad, Gita, Puranas, Architecture, Astrology, Astronomy, Ayurveda, Nritya Shastra, Music, etc. We need to explore all these fields and accept whatever suits us.

b) Is the author competent to suggest what shall be part of IKS or not? We don’t know. But in one statement, he has rejected the IKS system currently being followed, which is still developing.

3)   Use of words like myth and pseudoscience:

a)   Whatever he calls a myth is his personal opinion. Many people do not believe so; for them, the so-called myths are a record of the history of the nation. Can he prove the myths are ‘myths’? If not, is he not succinctly imposing his personal and negative opinion on the readers?

b)   What is a pseudoscience? Is science perfect in itself? Is science the touchstone to judge everything? Aren’t there forces and phenomenon which defy science? Should we reject them because they don’t conform to science? Einstein’s Relativity and Quantum physics defy classical physics and common sense. Haven’t we changed our science to accommodate new observations? Our objective shall be, if a thing is useful for mankind, we shouldn’t be bogged down by terms such as science or pseudoscience. Is he not again succinctly imposing his personal and negative opinion on the readers by terming something as pseudoscience since the word carries a negative connotation? Does the author know about the methodology and limitations of science? Is he assuming that the faculty of IIT is not competent to segregate sense from nonsense, that they don’t know the methodology and limitations of science and that they can’t investigate truthfully so-called pseudoscience?

c)   Thus, using words like ‘pseudoscience’ and ‘myth’, which have a connotation of something unscientific and unreal, respectively, he has already decided what he wants to conclude from the article.

4)  Col.-1, Para-4: He has used the names of great scientists like Jagdish Chandra Bose and Prafull Chandra Rai, just to add value to his article. He has tried to use their name to give value to the word pseudoscience he is using liberally. I don't think these scientists ever said anything about pseudoscience and decolonisation. He is, without any basis, saying that “they proved that decolonisation does not have to open the door to pseudoscience.” Did they ever say so? If yes, he should have quoted them here; if not, then isn’t he using their names to push his own narrative?  

5)   Col.-1, Para-4: “The IKS centres intend to embed myth-based inquiries in the framework of the IITs”. Isn’t the author showing disbelief in the competence of the IIT Faculty and the IIT system? Having spent a number of years in IIT as a student and about 30 years in academics elsewhere, I think IITs know better what they are doing, and if something goes wrong during a new and evolving system, they have the means of correcting it. Although IITs have many problems, it is a living and conscious system which has grown continuously despite many challenges.

6)  Col.-2, 3: He is also assigning motives to the introduction of IKS in IITs and other institutes, which is quite premature. It is only his ideological orientations which make him conclude like this. In any system, intent is very important, and it is not known until that system matures. Therefore, before a system matures, concluding that the system is going to bring politico-religious dogma into scientific institutions is just a fear or hypothesis.

7)  Col.-3, Para-2: “the participating IITs have signalled their willingness to trade their academic credentials for theological dogma.” Is the author not casting aspersions on IITs’ faculty? Does he have anything in support of his allegations, or is he doing so to steer the article to a particular conclusion? Is he not casting aspersion on the intent of the IITs faculty even before the system has matured?

8)   Col.-3 Para-4: "the 'researchers' are fundamentally creating the very stimuli they claim to be 'discovering'”. Is he not questioning the scientific temperament of IITs’ Faculty? Is he competent to do so? Is he not aware that all research work before being accepted goes through peer review?

9)   Col.-4, Para-2: Forceful approach – “it seems the Hindutva programme has finished shifting its strategy to an inside-out approach with top-down force. Doctoral students were required to attend the "special session". Nothing unusual about it. Almost in all organisations, when a program is organised, the biggest problem for the organisers is the audience. Everywhere, the audience is attracted in different ways; IITs are no different. But that doesn’t mean people accept an ideology due to ‘force’. At least in India, the ‘force’ doesn’t remain for long. Even if some people come to the fold of any philosophy due to a temporary ‘force’ or attractions, those who remain with any philosophy, almost do it voluntarily, and there is nothing wrong with it.

10) Col.-4, Para-2: “The lITs' administrators know they are compromising the institutions' reputation, but they are willing to risk that because their goal is not scientific leadership. It is domestic ideological consolidation.” What is the basis for this statement? The author seems to know too much about the IIT system, the faculty, and their hidden intentions. Or is it simply to reach a particular conclusion, which is the hidden objective of the author?

11)  Col-4, Para-3. “The spreading rot of pseudoscience at the IITs will encourage top-tier Indian talent to move to universities abroad.” It seems the author doesn’t know why a researcher moves to a different university in India or abroad. A researcher is guided by opportunities and remuneration in his field of specialisation. The institute’s character doesn’t affect his decision unless that becomes overwhelming and detrimental to his personal growth.

12)  Col-4, Para-3. “Good international scientists are beginning to look down on IIT’s degrees because of these 'special sessions'”. Does the author have any material in support of this statement, or is it just a statement thrown to reach a particular conclusion?

Conclusion:

1.  Despite commenting adversely on the article, I must agree that a person with a different allegiance may write a similar article in a different way, imposing his opinion on it and concluding a entirely different conclusion. That is, a similar article with the opposite conclusion may also be opianated and may face similar criticism.

2.  If the author's objective was to highlight a problem in the system, he should have considered the unbiased views of the faculty and students involved in the system and presented his results in the article. Instead of giving his opinion freely, he should have shared the experiences of the faculty and the students involved in it.

Suggestions:

1.   Such articles also serve an ulterior purpose in a democracy. The objective of such articles is to hold on to the people who believe in a particular narrative, to create confusion in the minds of the people who are sitting on the fence, and, if possible, to bring them over to this side. These articles create narratives and vote banks and are quite useful in democracies to change the course of a nation. Therefore, such articles are either promoted by political parties or unfriendly nations that wish to interfere in a democratic country.

2.   If such is the case, what is the safeguard for us? First, we need to differentiate between a scientific and a non-scientific article. In a non-scientific article, we need to differentiate between information, opinions and analysis. We need to critically examine the opinions and not be swayed by them. We need to understand the motive and credibility of the author and the media that promotes it. Lastly, we must fit in such articles in the historical, social, local and geo-political, and industrial framework and pick the trend rather than being swayed by a single article. This is an era of psychological warfare when the true objective of any action is hidden much below the surface. While examining an article, we shall also relate it to the underlying trend, which will expose the real purpose of the article.

3.   Nowadays, people rarely work for society, the nation, or humanity. Instead, they are working for sheer selfish motives. Like advertisements, creating narratives brings a lot of money. Therefore, to evaluate a non-scientific article, we must also investigate the character of the author, the media, and be aware of social, political, and commercial objectives and narratives being played.

Then only we may understand if the article is highlighting something important before us, or it is creating a narrative to serve its political or commercial objectives. 

The article:  

A Trojan horse has breached the IITs 

https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/a-trojan-horse-has-breached-the-iits/article71134594.ece

The Law of Karma vs. Vasudeva Sarvam Iti

Question: 

I was blessed to hear from you on Savitri, the Secret Knowledge

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=897NveFwhKY).

I truly believe that "Vasudev sarvam iti. He is the doer, and he is the deed. He is the actor, and he is the act. Srasta bhi wo hai, sristi bhi wo hi hai.  Man is only an instrument of the divine Will. When man does everything as per the instructions of the divine, then why should he suffer? Where do the questions of bad karma, good karma, karma phala, and karmic debt come from?  When one goes through a difficult time, then very often he is told "aap ko karma phala bhogtana padega". When I did nothing, then how am I supposed to suffer? Kindly enlighten.

Warm Regards,

A Sadhak of Savitri.

 

Reply:

“वासुदेवः सर्वम् इति" (श्रीमद्भगवद्गीता-०७/१९) - यह सकल जगत् ईश्वर ही है।

“Vasudev Sarvam Iti” means that the whole of this world is God, i.e., He is the Creator and the Creation; He is the Actor, and the act; He is the Dreamer and the dream; He is the Thinker and the thought. It is He alone who has become man. So, it is very natural to ask how a man is responsible for his acts when God is working through him, and what the justification for this law of Karma and Fate is. 

It will be appropriate to recall the first verse of the Sri Aurobindo Upanishad, which says -

“ॐ एकमेव अदिवितीयम् ब्रह्म सदसद्रूपं सदसद्तीतं नान्यत् किन्च्चिदस्ति त्रिकालधृतं त्रिकालातीतं वा सर्वन्तु खलु ब्रह्मैकं यत किन्च्च ज्गत्यामणु वा महेद्वोदारं वानुदारं वा ब्रह्मैव तद् ब्रह्मैव जगदपि ब्रह्म सत्यं न मिथ्या।“ (श्रीअरविन्दोपनिषद्:, verse-1)

Which means: “Om. There is Brahman alone, the One without a second. Being and non-being are its forms and It is also beyond Being and Non-Being. There is nothing else except That. All that is contained in the three times and all that is beyond the three times is indeed that One Brahman alone. Whatever is in the universe, small or large, noble or mean, is Brahman alone, Brahman alone. The world is also Brahman. It is true, not false.” 

In the Sri Aurobindo Upanishad, Sri Aurobindo says, “ॐ एकमेव अदिवितीयम् ब्रह्म and जगदपि ब्रह्म सत्यं न मिथ्या”, that is, all this is God, and there is nothing in this world which is other than God. This world is also God, and it is real. 

To understand the above problem, let’s now go through three examples -

 

Example-1)  

          Consider the realities of the awakened and dream states.

 

Both the realities of the awakened world and the dream world are true. However, when we are awake, the dream appears to us false, and when we are in a dream, the awakened world appears to us untrue. However, both are true in their own domains, but when we look at them from outside the domain in which they exist, they appear false to us.

 

When we are in the real world, we forget the dream world, and when we are in the dream world, we forget the real world, and therefore, one of the two realities appears to us as false.

 

The real problem is not that one or both observations are untrue, but that we are not able to rise to a world where both worlds appear in their proper place and in harmony with each other, and therefore, we are not able to see that both these observations are true.

 

Yet if we can take a higher position from which we can see both, we will find that both are real.

 

Example-2)   

 Consider the realities of Earth and Heaven.

 

        We all have heard about the glory of heaven, and many a man has attempted to reach heaven. Some of them, having reached heaven and being wonderstruck by its glory, came down and professed the path to heaven which they found, declared that the glory of heaven is not reachable on earth, and advocated leaving the earth as it is and working to enjoy heaven.

 

The reality of the Earth is not false; we know this, for we live here, while heaven is imaginary for us because we have no access to it. But heaven is not false - the reality of heaven is true in heaven, and the reality of earth is true on earth. So long as we are bound to earth, heaven appears false to us. Perhaps, for those who live in heaven, earth is false. It is only for those who can live both on earth and in heaven, transcend both earth and heaven, and can harmonise between earth and heaven, that both earth and heaven are true.

 

It is only when we can transcend earth and heaven and establish harmony between the two that we can find that both are real.

 

But why is it so?

 

In the cosmic lila, things have been so arranged that we get glimpses of the beauties of a higher world, but we can’t enjoy them unless we change and transcend our present limits. If it were so that we could enjoy heaven while living on earth, there would be no urgency to change earth, and earth would have remained the same for eternity. It is an evolutionary necessity, which entices us with glimpses of the glories of the higher world but does not let us enjoy them unless we change ourselves and become rightful claimants of those riches. This incompleteness and corresponding dissatisfaction force us to participate in evolution.

 

Example-3)   

         Consider a room which is closed from the inside, and you are trapped in it. But it is only you who has, in a moment of unconsciousness, closed the room from inside and hid the key somewhere inside the room. 

         Now, if you don’t know that you closed the room and also have the key to unlock it, you feel trapped in it. But the moment you remember that you have the key, you realise that you are in fact free. So, the feeling of freedom or imprisonment depends only on your memory. (Once we realise who we are and are able to recover our ‘smriti’ (स्मृति), we are no longer entrapped in the world or the body.)

 

Freedom and imprisonment are both real. So long as we do not have the smriti (memory), who we are, we are under the subjection of Nature and feel imprisoned, and the moment we get our smriti (memory) back, we become free and the masters of Nature.

 

        So, freedom and imprisonment are both true, but what we experience depends on the state of our consciousness.

 

Coming back to your question –

 

         The Law of Karma and Fate are true in the domain we live in, and the truth of “Vasudev Sarvam Iti” is true in a domain of perfect unity. Both seem contradictory, but both are simultaneously true.

 

God, being Omniscient, Omnipotent, and Absolute, can assume both states simultaneously. The Absolute, the Alone, and the All-Powerful can become One as well as Many simultaneously. But man bound by Reason thinks that the two are opposites and can’t exist together.

 

          So long as we live in human consciousness, we are governed by the Law of Karma and Fate; it is only when we rise much above this divided world to a world in which there is perfect unity and only One, that “Vasudev Sarvam Iti” is true.

 

        Even if the fundamental truth is “Vasudev Sarvam Iti”, it is only the Law of Karma and Fate that are applicable to us. So long as man is bound to human ignorance, he can’t claim the privileges of the world of unity. 

This is the cosmic lila; if it weren’t so, man would not feel himself entrapped and suffocated and never try to escape the human consciousness, and the whole plan of evolution would fail.

 

Not only that, a light, a beauty, a bliss from the highest region of creation enters our world and creates discontent among some. It is this discontentment which forces them to rise and find their truth. And the whole of humanity advances with them.

 

This is the hidden Divine Plan!

 

 

 

God and His Relationship with the World – A Problem Beyond the Human Mind

A few days back, we had a long discussion in a whatsapp group on God and the World. It ended without any consensus. But why? Why do we always fail to reach any conclusion on such topics?

1) There are many definitions of God and His relationship with the World, but none of                    them can be proved, because

• The definition of God and His relationship with the World lie in a non-physical (or a non-material) domain, which is beyond the purview of present-day science.

• Further, whatever the human mind constructs, it is always based on a set of assumptions. Since these assumptions vary from person to person, the definition of God and His relationship with the World varies from person to person.

2) Thus, people have different definitions of God and His relationship with the World, as per their own preferences. This is natural and absolutely fine, but the real problem arises when a person believes that his system is perfect and all others are incorrect or partly correct. Or when he believes that his worldview is better than others’. This is a problem of human psychology: we are imprisoned in our own worldview and unable to see things from another’s standpoint.

• For our worldviews are a result of our observations/ our experiences, the depth of our reasoning, and our affinity to a particular worldview. Our worldviews are different because we are different in all these aspects.

3) The right attitude, then, should be that all these definitions of God and His relationship with the World are our own choices. None is better than the other, for each one is simply a hypothesis that can’t be proved.

4) An important learning that arises out of this discussion is that whatever our beliefs are, they are simply our choices, which cannot be proved. Just as we have made one choice, we are free to make another. So, our approach should be, not to condemn any worldview but to realise that all of them are simply hypotheses. We shall learn to treat them as equals. If we want to pursue a particular worldview, it is simply our choice; it doesn't make us wiser than others.

5) A still more important issue is, are we happy with our worldview?

• If so, we may continue with whatever we believe in.   

• If not, we shall be ready to change our worldview. We may revisit our experiences, examine our conclusions, and explore and rework our affinities, for whatever worldview we have is simply a borrowed vesture and not us. 

 

For we are born free, but as we grow, we are entrapped in the norms, rituals, conventions, opinions, etc, of the world around us. Once we understand this, we shall strive to live freely unbound by any worldview, and choose a worldview that appears to us right at the moment. And we shall be ready to change or modify our worldview the moment we find flaws in it, for all our worldviews are borrowed worldviews and not our true beings.

Reality is vaster than Mind and always escapes its reach.

Note: You may join this blog by clicking the tab "Follow" at the top right of the blog.

Quotes on Life

 

• Life is complex, uncertain, and unpredictable. 

• Nature has its own objective - it is not to fulfil our desires.

• The World is a play of many forces, and Life is a struggle between competing forces. Our will is neither the only will nor the all-powerful will that determines our Life. 

• The purpose of Life is to explore oneself, to find the true purpose of one’s Life, and to express oneself. It doesn’t really matter whether you succeed or fail in your Life. Each failure brings you closer to the real purpose of your Life. Each success, after you have revelled in it and become disillusioned with it, tells you that this was not the true purpose of your Life. In fact, failure leads you faster to your true goal than success, for you tend to halt and enjoy your successes.

• The fundamental truth is that the human mind is incapable of making a decision. We need to transcend the human mind and know through the soul. Until we have found our soul, we remain in doubt and do not know the true purpose of our Life.

• Until we find the real purpose of our lives, we need to pick up a temporary purpose in our lives. Learn from the experiences of Life, explore ourselves, and move closer to the true purpose of our lives.

• The fundamental governing principle of our Life shall be the growth of oneself; beyond a point, all the necessities and compulsions of Life don’t matter.

• A truly analytical mind finds itself stuck in indecision. On the other hand, it is easier for a passionate mind to make a decision. Life decisions can’t be made by reason alone; they are always made with a mix of analysis and passion or a conscious choice. 

• Each one is right in his own way, yet no one is sure that he is on the right path or will achieve the goal he has set for himself.

• Life is complex, uncertain, and unpredictable. Accept and plan for the uncertainties of Life.

At a Crossroads

 

A Question from a Student:

“Sometimes you know something is not right for you, or you can get better, but you still want it. One reason for this is that I don't have the confidence to turn down anything and say I deserve better. What to do in situations like this?”

The Question and the Problem Reframed: 

“Sometimes I know something is not good for me, and I can get better, but I still choose it. One reason for this is that I don't have the confidence (i.e., I am afraid) to turn down something I have and say I deserve better. What shall one do in situations like this?”

The problem you raised is a common problem that almost everyone faces in their lives. If I may restate the problem, it is that -

We often find ourselves standing at crossroads and unable to decide which way to go, for we are afraid of losing what we have, or we are uncertain about the future. 

How shall we make a Decision in such a Situation?

To begin with, let me tell you that there are no clear-cut solutions to this problem. However, we may explore and understand the problem, for it will help us overcome the anxiety associated with indecision and help us make the best possible decision.

There are no clear-cut solutions to this problem. We need to explore and understand the problem for a better decision. 

The World is Very Complex:

The first principle we must understand is that the world is very complex. We know very little about the world, the forces that govern it, and the direction in which the world is moving.

• As per Indian scripture, there are many invisible forces, other than the physical forces, that govern this world. They are known as Gods. They follow Divine Will or Divine Law.

• If this is so, i.e., if we neither know the hidden forces nor their laws, it is impossible for anyone to predict the outcome of our actions. In other words, the world and our lives remain unpredictable.

The world is complex; the problem of uncertainty, consequently indecision, is very much part of our lives.

The World is a Play of Many Forces:

 The second principle we must understand is that the world is a play of many forces.

• Nature (or the World) has its own will, which is enforced by the Gods (or the hidden forces) that govern the world. If our will and Nature’s will are not in line, it is quite natural that there will be opposition to our will. And our will, being weak compared to the universal forces (Gods), will not fructify.

• Again, there are many people who are part of our system and have wills that may not be in line with, or against, our will. 

The World is a Play of Many Forces, and Life is a struggle between competing forces. Our will is neither the only will nor the all-powerful will that determines our life. Therefore, the outcomes of our efforts may or may not be in line with our will. 

Can Decisions based on Fear and Desire Ensure long-term Happiness?

Then, the third issue relates to our psychology and instincts. As we grow from a child to an adult, we acquire a personal value system based on the value systems of our family and society. Accordingly, we develop preferences – we like certain things and dislike others. We also have inbuilt likes and dislikes based on our instincts, which are ingrained in human beings over the millennia of evolution. These preferences, likes, and dislikes, coupled with our emotions, manifest as Fear and Desire and govern our decisions; we follow our desires and avoid our fears.

However, our fears as well as our desires are transient, i.e., they change with time. In other words, we are not sure if our fears and desires will remain the same as years roll on and we grow. This means that the decisions we make based on our current fears and desires will become irrelevant with time. 

It is very natural for us to follow our desires and avoid our fears. However, our fears and desires change with time. Therefore, we are never sure that by the time our actions mature, we will still want the same results for which we made the effort.

The Solution to Our Problem lies in how we look at the World and Life.

Then, what is the solution to our problem? The real solution to our problem lies in how we look at the world and life. We need to ponder over the following assumptions/conclusions and recalibrate our worldview -

• The purpose of Nature is not to fulfil our desires. It is an independent and conscious entity with an objective. We may align our objectives with Nature’s objective or work against it, but we can’t expect Nature to bow to our wishes.

• The purpose of Nature is not to fulfil our desires but to help us grow and become wiser. This is the essence of evolution. Therefore, we should not be bothered about material and social achievements; instead, they should become the means to help us understand life and become wiser. 

• Our objectives are transient; they keep changing with time. Late in life, when our desires and our goals are fulfilled, we will realize that we wanted something more or something else.

• All our achievements are going to end with our Death. Therefore, it doesn’t matter if we have achieved anything in life. What matters most is whether we have lived our lives happily or not.

• We need to find the true objective of our life. Are we governed by familial and social conditioning, and trying to fulfil the desires of our family and society? If so, remember that nobody is really looking at you; nobody is really concerned about you; the world will not shed a tear when we are not there. We must shed the familial and social compulsions and find the true objective of our life.

• The purpose of life is not to fulfil someone else’s desire or ambition. The purpose of life is to explore oneself, find the true purpose of one’s life, and express oneself. It doesn’t really matter whether you succeed or fail in your life. Each failure brings you closer to the real purpose of your life. Each success, after you have revelled in it and gotten disillusioned with it, tells you that this was not the purpose of your life. Thus, the process of exploring oneself goes on until you find your life's real purpose.

• Life is uncertain. We must accept the uncertainties of life and get out of the idea that life should be kind to us or that life should move the way we want it.

The purpose of life is to explore oneself; to find the true purpose of one’s life, and to express oneself. It doesn’t really matter whether you succeed or fail in your life. Each failure brings you closer to the real purpose of your life. Each success, after you have revelled in it and gotten disillusioned with it, tells you that this was not the purpose of your life. 

The Nature and the World are not there to fulfil our desires.

What shall we do until we find the True Purpose of Our Life?

 What do we need to do until we find the true purpose of our life?

• Until we have found he real purpose of our life, we need to pick up a temporary purpose in our life. Learn from the experiences of life, explore ourselves, and move closer to the true purpose of our lives.

• We shall widen our knowledge and understand how the world and life move. We need to know economics, politics, human behaviour, human psychology, society, relationships, philosophy, etc., because all these help us understand the direction in which the world and man are moving.

• We shall meet the so-called successful people and the so-called failed people. Discuss our issues with them and learn from them. Know that the so-called failed people also have some great insights and knowledge to share.

• Learn from the Old, the Elders, the Intellectuals, the Rustic, and the Young, for each one has something important and useful to share that can help you understand the world and man.

• As we learn and grow, we shall reevaluate our hopes, our fears, and our goals.

The underlying truth is that the human mind is incapable of making a decision. We need to transcend the human mind and know through the soul. Until we have found our soul, i.e., until we know the purpose of our life, and are free of doubt, we shall continue to move, explore, and grow.

Will this Attitude solve Our Problem?

 Will all these efforts resolve the issue before us?

• Unfortunately, No! As we grow, we move closer to the solution, but we don’t reach the true solution. The underlying truth behind this uncertainty is that the human mind is incapable of resolving this problem. The solution to this problem lies in transcending the human mind and knowing through the soul. Until then, doubt, confusion, indecision, etc., will remain as part of our lives.

• Although we will be able to make better decisions as we grow, an element of doubt still remains, because one thing that is absolutely certain in this world is that nothing is certain. 

• After we have explored and analysed to the best of our knowledge, we shall take the path which appears best to us and then leave the result in the hands of Nature/ God.

The underlying truth is that the human mind is incapable of making a decision. We need to transcend the human mind and know through the soul. Until we know the purpose of our life, and are free of doubt, we shall continue to move, explore, and grow.

Returning to the Original Problem:

Returning to the original problem – Should we remain satisfied with what we have achieved because we fear losing what we have, or are afraid of exploring the unexplored?

• My answer would be – explore yourself, explore the objective of your life, understand the world, learn from people around you, and make an informed decision. But remember, life is uncertain; neither remaining where you are nor moving ahead can guarantee so-called success and happiness in life. To be happy, we need to change the way we look at the World, Man, and Life.

• You can remain in your current position, escape the disturbances caused by the change, and explore the inner world and the world around you. Or you can take a newer position with different responsibilities and explore the world from different standpoints.

• Both are OK – while one is good for some, the other is good for others.

• One can even move alternately between the two.

The fundamental governing principle of our life shall be the growth of oneself; beyond a point, all other necessities and compulsions matter not.

Does Everyone Face the Problem of Indecision?

• People who are passionate behave differently. Some do not take risks because either they are afraid of the unknown or are satisfied with where they are. Others, not satisfied, take a jump. It varies from person to person – whether fear dominates him or desire and hope.

• People who are rational remain stuck in analysis, for no analysis can resolve the issue of uncertainty through logic. Once they are exhausted analysing the problem, they decide under the pressure of circumstances, one way or the other. Their decision depends partly on their analysis, the incomplete and/or incorrect information they have, and their hunch. That doesn’t mean that their decisions are perfect. But in the end, they are applauded or condemned not based on their imperfect decision, but on the outcome of their actions.

Not everyone faces this dilemma. It is easier for a mind dominated by passions to make a decision. However, it is an analytical mind that finds itself stuck in indecision. In the end, the decision is always made by passion or conscious choice.

Each one is right in his own way, yet no one is sure that he will achieve the goal he has set for himself.

Summary and Guidelines:

• There are no clear-cut solutions to the problem of indecision. However, we must explore and understand the problem so that we may make a well-informed decision.

• The world is complex. Therefore, the problem of uncertainty, consequently indecision, is very much part of our lives.

• The World is a play of many forces, and Life is a struggle between competing forces. Our will is neither the only will nor the all-powerful will that determines our life. Therefore, the outcomes of our efforts may or may not be in line with our will. 

• The Nature and the World are not there to fulfil our desires.

• It is very natural for us to follow our desires and avoid our fears. However, our fears and desires change with time. Therefore, we are never sure that by the time our actions mature, we will still want the same results for which we made the effort.

• The purpose of life is to explore oneself, to find the true purpose of one’s life, and to express oneself. It doesn’t really matter whether you succeed or fail in your life. Each failure brings you closer to the real purpose of your life. Each success, after you have revelled in it and gotten disillusioned with it, tells you that this was not the purpose of your life. In fact, failure leads you faster to your true goal than success, for you tend to halt and enjoy your successes.

• The underlying truth is that the human mind is incapable of making a decision. We need to transcend the human mind and know through the soul. Until we have found our soul, i.e., until we know the purpose of our life, and are free of doubt, we shall continue to move, explore, and grow.

• Until we find the real purpose of our life, we need to pick up a temporary purpose in our lives. Learn from the experiences of life, explore ourselves, and move closer to the true purpose of our lives.

• The fundamental governing principle of our life shall be the growth of oneself; beyond a point, all the necessities and compulsions of life matter not.

• Not everyone faces indecision. It is easier for a mind dominated by passions to make a decision. However, it is an analytical mind that finds itself stuck in indecision. The decision is always made by a mix of analysis and passion (or conscious choice). 

• Each one is right in his own way, yet no one is sure that he will achieve the goal he has set for himself, or that he is on the right path.

• Life is complex, uncertain, and unpredictable. We shall make an informed choice and remain prepared for the unexpected. 

Being Selfish – Collectivity to Individuality to Being One and Many Simultaneously

 Being Individual is a Natural Step in Earth’s Evolution:

The purpose of animal life was to preserve its species and make it available as a stable and secure platform for future evolution.

Man, too, is a laboratory for future evolution. But the purpose of man is twofold – i.e., to preserve humanity to provide a secure base for future evolution, and to support the evolution by expressing inherent multiplicity. Being individual is a natural step in the Earth’s evolution. Selfishness is only a faster means of achieving the same.

Being Individual is to Fulfil the Purpose of Nature:

The Purpose of Nature is to express ‘One to Many’ (एकोऽहं बहुस्याम्). This is the law that governs the world. ‘One’ can’t manifest itself in ‘Many’ without individuality. Therefore, being individual is the logical, natural and underlying urge of Nature.

Being Individual is to be Happy:

In all his movements, Man seeks happiness. But he can’t be happy unless there is harmony between what he is within and that which he is outside. To express what one is within is to be an individual, and a right step towards being happy.

Collectivity vs Individuality:

Systems, such as family, society and organisations, have their own egos. In general, they are more concerned about their own existence, structure, and dominance than individuals’ (their constituents’) happiness, and build themselves at the expense of the individuals. This apathy forces man to revolt and break away from the systems, create their own world, and nourish their individuality. The efforts towards individuality are termed selfishness. However, selfishness is an unrefined urge to explore and express oneself.

It is only in the process of becoming an individual that a man will realise his true being and the relevance of systems. Individuality and collectivity are both important. They support each other and should grow together. Any effort by one to dominate the other is going to invite pushback.

Moving from self-centred collectivity to self-centred individuality, humanity will attain harmony between them, because, at least in the present environment where we are largely interdependent, none can live without the other. This, then, shall lead to a stage in which systems and individuals will become equally important and mutually beneficial.

Man is an Individual and All, simultaneously:

Selfishness is one of the means by which human evolution is progressing from Collectivity to Individuality. However, superficial individuality, - an individuality devoid of universality, is not going to bring permanent happiness to man either, because man is essentially universal. He is a soul, which is nothing but a part and the Whole.

ॐ पूर्णमदः पूर्णमिदं पूर्णात् पूर्णमुदच्यते। पूर्णस्य पूर्णमादाय पूर्णमेवावशिष्यते।

अर्थ: बाह्य जगत् पूर्ण है, आंतरिक जगत् भी पूर्ण है, पूर्ण से पूर्ण प्रकट होता है, पूर्ण में से पूर्ण लेने पर भी पूर्ण ही शेष रहता है।

He must move from collectivity to individuality to being ‘One’ and ‘Many’ simultaneously.

Human Evolution:

Man, however, when he appears selfish (individualistic) in his actions, he still lives by the collective mentality. This movement towards individuality should grow until it brings mental independence or mental individuality.

Evolution will not stop until man grows truly individual. It is then that he will realise true Unity.

It is then that the Earth and Man will achieve Unity that is simultaneously blissful Multiplicity.

Concluding Note:

Selfishness is not something to be condemned. It is a force working for the evolution of mankind. Man, who has been largely living in a group at the cost of his individuality, shall break apart to seek his individuality. It is only when he becomes truly Individual that he will become truly Universal.

‘One to Many’ (एकोऽहं बहुस्याम्) is the law of the Earth and the law of Evolution.

Selfishness is currently the force that is pushing for this movement. We may term it an evil force from the standpoint of a distant ideal of Harmony, but at the current level of humanity, it is doing its work perfectly fine.