by Sri Bmal Mohanty
VOL No. 26
Feb. 2003

THE THREE OBSTACLES TO DEVELOPMENT

"Based on lectures by Sri Bimal Mohanty"

  QUESTIONS FROM THE READERS

QUESTION 1 from Sri Kartik Patel

Would like to know current context and importance of karma and luck. Which is higher? Which part should be given importance and at what time?

Ans : If you have been reading the previous articles in AHWAN (especially volumes 3,4 & 5) you would have got a fair idea of the relationship between our own actions(Karma) and the so called destiny. There is no such thing as luck. It is an expression by which the mind rationalises its own ignorance of all contributing factors because of which an event (any event) takes place. In the divine scheme of things whatever action we do now becomes the cause of a corresponding effect to happen in near or distant future. Similarly, what is happening to me now is the effect of my very own actions done in the past. It is called prarabdha or sanchita karma. I create my own destiny. Ofcourse, being a part of the entire creation, the external factors mould the shape of these effects. But our own actions are the roots. Until we have the full knowledge and total consciousness we can not foresee exactly how specifically our actions will show up in future. So when something happens which we can not explain, we name it "luck" or "destiny."

So what is expected of us under these circumstances? All recognised religions of the world have the simple answer. Let all your actions (this includes thoughts too) be in conformity with Dharma all the time. To act always in conformity with Dharma or righteousness, the mind has to remain in constant tuning with the Divine. Remaining in constant tuning with the Divine is same as being in Yoga. That is the advice which Bhagavad Gita gives Yogastha kuru karmani. Do all actions remaining in Yoga. If you do, you always have favourable destiny or the luck which is good for you.

QUESTION 2 from Ms Reema

Dear Sir

Why marriage is required in life?

Also FROM Mr Appuchu

I wish to know what is the origin of Institutionalisation of marriages.

Ans : Let us analyse these questions both from social angle as well as spiritual angle. Before we say why marriage is necessary, it will be interesting to probe how and why this institution of marriage became part of our system.

In the early ages of human existence, when social norms and conducts had not been devised, human existence must have been close enough to animal existence. Gender is the nature's definition of two physical entities which must combine for further procreation. Procreation is the root necessity without which the creation can not move on. An urge to procreate is built into everyone's metabolic system. If you strip out the fantasies of physical attraction at one end and voluntary suprasensual relationship at the other end, (both being fantastic exceptions rather than norms) then one can understand that the union between male and female is a necessity as any other physical (sense dictated) necessity and the purpose is procreation. Gita says that after creating the beings, Prajapati asked them to go and procreate as only by that the creation must thrive.

However as the human intellect developped, it dawned on the humans that every physical act borne out of the dictation by our senses, must be governed by limits and restrictions. Uncontrolled desire and acts there-of leads to ruin. In the animal world the union is free and mostly dictated by the brutal power, and "might being the right". In the superior human world on the other hand might is not the right, but right is only right. Humans found out for themselves that a superior social norm must protect every body. What belongs to one must not be coveted by the others. Therefore a relationship between two beings should not be allowed to become "free" relationship between "any" two beings. It is also argued that free sex does not produce genetically superior offsprings.

Considering all aspects, the collective wisdom of the human race decided that the union between two opposite sexes therefore must follow strict social norms and the institution of marriage provided legitimacy and self imposed control over this very powerful urge within ourselves. It also defined serious responsibilities between the partners. Lest ignorant people still deviate from the norms, the institution was made ritualistic and part of religion for added control.

This was also spiritually correct. Bringing an offspring into life is a divine act. It is the extention of Bramhan Himself into this phenomenal world. The parents are only accessories. Procreation is a necessity for existence. Without the controlling effect of the institution of marriage, this divine necessity shall degenerate into mindless proliferation, genetic disorders, shirking of responsibilities and uncontrolled sense gratification by the intellectually inferiors. When control over senses as a means for spiritual development is so difficult to achieve, how can this be tolerated?

  Back