THE MYTH OF DECOLONIALITY

 

"All that is good and correct must be objectively universal. Universality is not just another feature but a necessity of correctness. On the other hand, there are two enemies of the correct universal. First is seemingly correct Local and the other is Incorrect Universal". 

Here, I am going to discuss if Decolonization, detaching oneself with the symbols and identities of Cultural Colonialism is possible or not. 

In India, we see two strands of such thinkers who wish to have a mentality of decoloniality. One of these are those noble post-colonial thinkers, which includes Nivedita Menon, Partha Chatterjee, Dipesh Chakraborty etc. whom I have great respect. Another strand is the strand of revivalist right wingers, which includes RSS, Hindu Radicals and People like J Sai Deepak. 

It is, as if, separating oneself with the history is even possible. We must realize that the myth of decoloniality is an urban myth. The rural India does not even know decoloniality. To be fair, they do not even know Colonization. For them, it was a continuance of an oppression with morphed ways. First, the ancient kings exploited the rural India, then came medieval Mughals, then amongst the Rural upper castes, and so much so, and at the end came a White man. 

I have a vulgar example to explain this. This is horrible but required. Treat Rural India like an 8-year-old Girl and Urban India as a 16-year-Old Girl, both brutally raped, as a matter of fact, gangraped, which is appropriate example seeing a vast culture of gangrape in India, and now, when they both have grown up, on one hand, you see the older girl complaining, and wishing to return to the pre-rape era. For her, This, pre-rape era exists. But, that era does not exist for the younger girl, not because she is young but because even before all those men raped both of them, the older girl used to harass sexually the younger. 

For the younger girl, unlike the older, this is a never-ending cycle of Penetration, inappropriate touching, violation of consent and above all, Patronization of justice. As if, The Urban India understands what the Rural India has gone through. 

I claim, first of all, The Urban India here is all the Elites that were products of colonialism itself. Upper Caste Brown Men, with newly read Montesquieu and Rousseau. The Rural India has not read Rousseau till date. Not to say Rousseau was some great thinker. He was the bare minimum, although. 

This Allegory of Gangrape is essential to explain the gravity of our predicament. I claim, Urban India wants to return to or if not return, detach oneself from the brutal memories of colonization because for them, it is possible to imagine a space detached from a significant part of history. Those who are Urban elites today, had Ancestors of rural Feudal lords. The rural India was Hell back then, it is just a hell with a new color of fire in it, White fire. In fact, it hurts less, lesser than the hurts of their own countrymen, controversial yet effective proposition, that an India, as it has today existed back in the medieval times. If it existed, it was shit of a place for the rural folks. 

 India was not a nation; its nationhood has attributes in the colonial legacy. It is in the rape that both the girls have grown up, and nothing more than the rape has contributions in constructing the identity of womanhood in the girls. I am not justifying here the rapes. Of course, I am against the brutality of colonialism, but we need to realize one thing, there was no body without the wound. The concept of wound created the concept of a woundless body. 

Woundlessness is impossible I claim. History is history. In fact, to use the Vedantic jargon, do not get me wrong, I am not a revivalist of Vedantic tradition, but to use knowledge is not bad, the only woundless state possible is when you accept the wound as a permanent mark. Then it hurts less. 

The problem with the first class of thinkers, The Post-colonials, is that they are reactionary to both the colonial thinkers and the Marxist thinkers. And somehow, they believe in the myth of Decoloniality. In this myth is implicit is the myth of a pre-colonial revivalism somewhere. 

The point is not to separate the brutal of the cultural history from the better. I claim, the better of history seems better, only because there exists a brutal. A common man like Gandhi, seems special only because there was the beast of colonialism to be fought. Otherwise, the kind of Philosophies India had, you can still find Gandhi at every nook and corner of this country. The reason Gandhi does not impress me, and to some extent he does as well, is first of all, he is unoriginal, whatever he represents, in him, I claim, is all that is there in the Hindu, Jain and Buddhist traditions, what is good in Gandhi, is what I say is a western attribute. The fearlessness of Gandhi comes from the ideas of honesty, etc. which he takes inspiration from Tolstoy, Ruskin etc. I understand that these are universal ethos that exists in every culture including that in India's, but one thing is imperative, you need to see those values in action to opt them. West was a place not only of brutal colonialism and Enlightenment and a sense of civilization mission, but it was also a place of people awakening to the values of Individuality, Freedom, and rights.

There for the first time in history, we see these ideas in action. On the other hand, we see in India, which we call land of spiritual ideas, a dearth of action of ideas because of the Intellectual Hegemony of Brahmins who concentrated ideas to themselves and propagated the ideas of I claim, the worst kind of humanity possible, "The casted Humanity", that idea that Human beings in order to live, must live in a graded unequal fashion. The Philosophy of Caste, I claim, is the sole original Idea of India, not because we did not have a tradition of Vedanta, or Buddhism. I claim, what good are noble ideas, when the sole ideas in action were Casteism and Feudalism. 

This notion of Ideas in action as true test for what existed and what was mythical is very essential to remind us of which glorious past are we talking about. There are ideas in action and then there are mythical ideas that we propound to feel good about ourselves. It is like a student who makes a very tight schedule to study, like 12 hours a day, but studies only for 2. The schedule is there to feel good about oneself. 

We need a separate development on the notion of mythical ideas. One such idea is that written in Upanishads, "Vasudev Kutumbkam", or the whole world is a family. No doubt, the one who wrote it, felt something, he was not hypocritical. But This is there today, for us, just as a showpiece, to feel good. Nobody in India, really believes in this. On one hand, this was taken as the theme of the G20 summit that happened in India, on other hand, some years back, we heard, I think the Chief of Defense Staff of India, say, "It was foolish Idea, the world is not my family". 

To which people can say, he is a defense personnel, of course, he will say that. I claim, no, this is what India really is. It is not a welcoming place to the world. It is now a land of insecure people, who believe in a parochial vision of nationhood, thanks to Colonialism, the brutal cultural and economic rape. 

So, key takeaways, first, the wound creates the myth of woundlessness, there was never, at least in the near past, a woundless state.  

Second, to maintain this myth, we create mythical ideas, or so to speak, we revive mythical ideas, like a mythical beast, which acts as a soundproof of our glorious past, which is all fake. The true past can be seen in the Ideas in action, not in the Mythical ideas, we create to feel good about ourselves. Vedantic tradition is this sense is Vendetta tradition, Buddhism is dumbism. 

Lastly, the only way to decolonize, is no way to put it in a Buddhist fashion. Or to put it Vedantically, the only way is to accept colonialism as a brutal reality and a non-detachable part of history. By non-detachable, I do not mean, attach yourself to it, I mean, exactly what I write, a Hegelian negation of negation, non-de-attachable. 

I will develop more on the mythical Ideas later. 

HISTORICISM OR LOGICAL CONSTRUCTIONISM?

There are two strands of Criticism that takes place regarding Hegel's overall Philosophy. When we talk about Hegel's Philosophy, although it has many nuances and sub-structures, broadly, it can be described under three heads, namely, 

1. Phenomenological approach to Spirit, since we can approach spirit phenomenologically only. 

2. Dialectical Idealism which includes conflict and contradictions of ideas which leads to their movement in history. 

3. The Master-Slave Dialectic. 

Of all the three, there are two strands of Critique of Hegel, who does not understand Hegel, In my opinion, In fact, In the opinion of Slavoj Zizek. 

1. Teleological interpreters of Hegel: People like Liberal Hegelians who interpret Hegel in a teleological Fashion. Their Opinion about the Dialectic Idealism is that ideas have a single function of leading to its conflicting thought, namely the Anti-thesis. The Anti-thesis, in turn, has a function of conflicting with thesis to give the synthesis. 

As a matter of fact, this teleology out of Hegel is never found. In the Phenomenology of spirit, Hegel argues about nowhere about a single teleological function of ideas. Ideas are seldom created to serve the purpose of movement of History. In a way, they are never prospective, they are always Retrospective. 

2. Another one includes Karl Popper's critique of Hegel being a Historicist. Historicism is a way of approaching episteme through the sequence as it happened in history. To which, I agree. But It is not in following historicism does one act as agent of history. And hence, this argument also considers a teleological view out of Hegel that Hegel's ideas are a means to the absolute. Rather, opposite, Hegel's ideas occur only when the agents of history detach themselves from the past and the future and act "logically" in search of answers of the predicaments of the present. 

Hence, in a nutshell, to act logically of the present, is the way to be the agent of history. The rational being the real of history. 

For instance, suppose a man got hold of his destiny, that is, he somehow knows that he is going to be rich and retrospectively, in the present he decides to be lazy, he will precisely because of this "naive cunning" behavior of seeing event in a historical fashion and not logically, he will not become rich. 

One has to actively engage in wealth accumulation in order to be rich, that is the dictum of common sense. For this common sense to act, destiny should remain for all purposes hidden. So, for historicism to prevail, or for destiny to prevail, One must not know it, One must act accordingly as one deems fit. 

This is the way to be the agent of history, the agent of historical change. Not to be a historicist, but to be a logical constructivist. And Hegel is precisely that. His historical idealism is an attempt to logically decode the idea of historical progression of ideas themselves. As if, the dog chasing its own tail. 

UPSC GEETA 4: HELL SURROUNDING OUR LIVES

"What is the last problem you were talking about?" I asked him. After our discussions till now, I was now excited to know what he has to say. 

He said, "The final problem of all of existence is the conflict between our perceptions of good life and what is actually good life!" 

"But is not this subjective as to what is a good life? Isn't it on discretion of the individual what should be good for him?" 

"Yes, this is what you have been taught by the contemporary political science. Rights in the discourse of Political science, has been always a historical reaction to unfreedoms. All your granted freedoms are a reflection of your past unfreedoms. Article 17 in the Indian Constitution guarantees Abolition of untouchability. Hasn't there been untouchability in the past, there will not be any article in the constitution to protect them! This does not mean that the rights guaranteed by the constitution are the sole basis of freedom. They are subject to history and historical process. The real test for freedom is the inner conscience of every individual, which remains untouched, untapped. In reality, what is good for an individual is only that which frees the individual. Mukti is the sole criteria for goodness. Anything other than that, that which binds the individual in future, cannot be called a proper good thing. Even if it sounds delightful. Have you asked yourself, what is genuinely freedom for you?" 

"Wait, I did not understand this. I am not in some kind of slavery. Am I? I am an upper caste Hindu male coming from a middle class. Who is more privileged than me in this country?", I inquired. I become curious. Also, because I had a strong belief in Indian constitution, and I was not happy with the social conditions of the country. Rule of law was a joke even after 75 years of this country. Privileges were the way society operates. Caste, Gender, Religion and over all class prevailed. When Veer Das, the famous comedian said, "There are two Indias." I disagreed. There are at least 10 Indias. As you go down in the economic and caste strata, you will find more ancient and more conservative Indias, more hellish and more gruesome than the last". This was the reason of my lethargy that this country cannot change. But also, a little hope somewhere, which made me try this exam. More of the reason was personal, but somewhere I wanted to work for the marginalized, to make them mainstream. I am emotional for them, may be a little bit. I wanted to change things. But I was already born hopeless. Hopelessness towards welfare state is what the air around me got me. Nobody trusted the state. Especially the Indian state. Gone were the days of Nehruvian socialism, where a promise of "Swaraj" was there. Today, it was clear that the world is Foucauldian. A power quest between different groups called political parties prevailed. "The Iron law of Oligarchy" was the norm. In these historical contexts, I almost taunted him saying this. This came from a place of frustration towards society at large. 

"Do you think only the marginalized are not free? The society which is feudal in its sole philosophy cannot leave any of its inhabitants. What do you think is the Philosophy of this Indian society?"

"I don't know, unity in diversity?" 

"It is Caste. It is in the genes of this country and the culture. Caste is the Philosophy of Indian society. Let me tell you how. Why do you think there is so much charm about this Exam? Why everyone wants to be an IAS?"

"Because it is a luxurious job? It is falsely glamourized."

"So, first of all, you agree this is falsely glamourized. Secondly, the glamourization is secondary. The primary reason why people are attracted to IAS is because it is a government job. Government jobs are permanent in nature. It provides job security. and IAS comes in the pinnacle of these jobs. The Philosophy of caste is the following. The way it is in a hierarchy. The most hardworking is in the lowest rungs of the hierarchy. The topmost is the most falsely glorified. The only reason they are respected is because they made some rules of supersititions that they declared Dharma,

and this is how they almost decided what they will do and all they do are all symbolic and fictitious jobs. Hawan, puja, yagya. What do they fetch us? Air Pollution? Waste of timber and ghee? Only that. There job does not contribute in the welfare of society at large. And they are respected the most. What do you think this tell you about the nature and philosophy of this society?" 

"That here respect is earned through caste?" 

"This is a very narrow conclusion. The wider conclusion is, this society only respects someone who can exploit and eat, earn without working in the society. "Jo Baith ke Khayega, Wahi Ganga Nahayega"". 

"Today's craze for government jobs can be traced to this very psyche of Indians. Give them luxury without having a necessity to work. A job security that promises them no-risk and no-emergency for life. This over-secure job makes them eligible for being lethargic and become the ultimate conservator of the same system it intends to change." 

I found myself clueless.

He said further, "Just think about Akhilesh, your friend. Remember why he wanted to become an IAS? What was his prime motivation?" 

I recalled in my mind. He once told me, "I have promised my father that I will become an IAS. Many of my family members are already in government services. Now, I have to keep my promise." That time, I really appreciated his adherence to his done promise. I felt he really respected his parents. I wondered how this person got to know about this. 

He continued, "So, that is his motivation. This is his worldview. This he has been taught by the society, in this case, his own family. We do not even remember when we internalize this violence that they do with us. Before even our own wishes come to light, we learn how to listen our conscience's voice, a father's dream is forced through our throats. We do not even remember when we start worshipping these rapacious deeds. To penetrate through the conscience of a child and force a manufactured dream through his mind is equivalent to rape. Rape is what parents do. Rape is what the children start respecting." 

"So, you are telling me, that these manufactured dreams are wrong? One should not become IAS?" 

"I am telling you to consider the effects of the society at large on the individuals. Won't you agree that without right intent since the beginning, no good thing can actually be achieved? Do you think these are right intents? Are these even original intents?" 

I felt guilty now. I felt as if I am Akhilesh. I felt my motivations might also be like these probably. 

"No, You do not currently possess any solid intent, that is why I am talking you. You keep dangling. Sometimes you decide that you want to be an IAS for your parents, your grandfather, his pride. Sometimes you decide when you see something bad happening, an urge upsurges in you to change things as it is. Sometimes you just want freedom of the conditionings as it is. I have hopes with the third view of yours. Only this view of freedom is closer to Mukti." 

"How can it be? Even I am not sure of what I want. I do not want this. I do not want anyone else deciding what religion I should be in. I should decide which person I should marry. I should decide what pictures to keep at my home. But, I do not know, if I reject all my parent's conditionings, and Grandparent's way of life, I do not know if I will be satisfied?" 

"The most important thing is you want to lose those chains. Only thing to realize is your perceptions of happiness and a good life also derives from their perceptions only. But thank your luck, there are gaps in these perceptions. You want a happy life, but will you call your life happy, if you have to live with a person, who has literally bought you with an amount of money that this society calls, Dahej. Will you?"

A thought of scare rattled me from inside. I felt as if I saw hell. I said, "it will be hell".

"Precisely, people's perception of good life is very ignorant and delusional. People literally sell men for the name of Dahej. Which self-respecting man will accept this? But Delusion prevails. People take pride in taking money for sex. This is socially validated Prostitution. Now, the kind of thing you said. The way people live, this is Hell par excellence. But the minds of human beings are amazing. They convince themselves that they live happily this way only." 

"There are numerous examples. People eat meat. That is, literally eating flesh and blood of other animals like them. What is closer to flesh of an animal? Flesh of a human or fibers of Plants? But Human beings justify this violence saying it is edible. They add spices and eat. Animals keep screaming. Animals cry. Animals die. Humans enjoy." 

But, then, what is the way? How to know that what we are living is a perception of good life and not good life? 

"A good life is an authentic existence. An existence where there are no exceptions between individual and collective goodness. What is good of anyone life must be good for all lives. Is eating meat good for the chicken? No, then it cannot be good for you who is eating them." 

"An authentic existence rejects special privilege that the ego gives to oneself. When the ego doesn't place himself on top of everyone else, will not eat meat. He will not sell himself for sex. He will not degrade his companionship this easily." 

"An authentic existence is based on Dharma. Dharma that is the act of listening to the inner conscience and to be able to do what is right without thinking about the consequences it will have on the ego. Ego is meant to suffer. Let it suffer. You keep doing what is right."

There are a lot many things about authentic existence. If you want it, I can tell you. But let me beware you. Knowing it will mean doing it. Once one knows it, He has no alternatives but to follow Dharma. Do you think you are in senses to listen? 

I was still doubting it. I was scared. I was still not over the Hell surrounding our lives. I wanted 15 more minutes. 

 

UPSC GEETA 3: IDENTIFYING QUASI-TRUTHS

 "What are those problems?"  

I was waiting for his answer. I was thinking and trying to interpret the brief silence that occupied him. But he was busy smiling and looking at me. Why is he smiling? My patience is struggling. I now want my answers. Am I supposed to interpret his smile as well? Is this world this intricate? Is my mind this intricate? What else is fake? 

He interrupted my train of thought, "Do not overthink!" 

I will tell you two things today. The remaining two problems. 

I said, "go on!" 

"The third problem is the distinction between fabrications of your mind and reality." 

"exactly", I exclaimed, as if I knew this, "But how to know what fabrication is and what is reality?" 

"Do not jump, do not pretend to know something that you somehow guessed through deductive and inductive reasoning. Reason is not knowledge; it is a tool. Knowledge is right experience interpreted rightly", He blasted on me. 

I was honestly not ready for this. I got surprised. I had no idea that a chill guy like him can scream at the top of his voice and so loud over this. I remained silent. I was afraid because I thought someone would l hear us. 

He said, this time calmly enough, "Do not worry, nobody can listen to us. Time has stopped!" 

I was wondering if what he is saying is true. I wanted to verify it. And now my Physics brain was taking over and I wanted to know how he did it? My curiosities were turning another way. 

"Do not get distracted!", He continued, "You do not have a guided curiosity, your curiosity derives from a lust for knowledge which is just a fool's curiosity. I suggest you develop control over your curiosity. Once you do it, you will become a Gyani". 

"Who is a Gyani?" 

I instantly regretted. I am sorry. 

He continued, laughingly, "You are such an idiot. Now listen, just see what your problem is. Not Nikhil's, Not Akash's. Specifically, yours. Isn't your problem this lack of distinction?  You were an avid dreamer since childhood, aren't you? At a young age, you used to imagine whole stories in your mind, and you used to enjoy them on your own. Your family members used to see you playing with yourself alone in your backyard. In this, you have once dropped a whole TV set on yourself, do you remember?" 

Yes, I did. I wonder how does he know? 

He continued, "Actually, your whole life has been a fight between your mind and your conscience to remain in reality. You used to imagine stories about yourself. What vivid fictions you used to imagine. You could have been a very good fiction writer. But you used to imagine that for yourself. Haven't you spread a lot of false stories about yourself to your friends? You got your first girlfriend through this false storytelling, didn't you?" 

I felt embarrassed. He continued. 

"Also, you kept fooling yourself all these whiles. You fooled yourself telling you are very smart and intelligent. You fooled yourself saying you are born to be a Physicist. You fooled yourself and your Girlfriend, Simarti, a bright future of how you two will be together. Haven't you? The moment she realized this fiction, she broke up. She realized, you live more in fiction than in reality. You also realize it sometimes, like when you left your PhD, your fiction broke. The fiction demanded hard work. Hardwork broke your fairy tale. And it broke your illusion that you were intelligent."

"Now, you stand naked, at zero point, having nothing, no achievements, pure at a struggling point. Even now, you try to escape to fiction thinking about future, IAS, and DM and all that, but you need to awaken yourself, see what fiction is and avoid all fictions at all costs". 

I was shaking from inside. He almost killed me. I did not know what to say, what to think, what to feel, what to be. He snatched away all fictions from me. 

Silence prevailed. 

I cleared my throat, and tried to ask, "But does that mean I am a fool, that I am not intelligent, that I am not any good, Will I not be able to achieve anything in life?" 

"What I am telling you is taking a firm grasp on reality. And you are again asking me to give you a static answer. Fool, stupid, Intelligent, achiever, achievement, all these are static Quasi-truths. In reality, Humans have made these categories through language. They do not exist as absolutes in reality. Language is not at all something to be relied upon. Language is fictional."

Somehow, I realized, what he is saying is much deeper. He is not asking me to drop my lies. He is telling me to drop everything other than this present moment. 

Just when I was going to ask, "What else is fiction around me, Enlighten me master!" 

He said, without even letting me start asking, "Everything that has a limited space and time extension is false". Memories are fictions, Imaginations are fictions, Language created to name and identify things are fictions, Relationships are fictions, Matter is fictional, Thoughts are fictional, Ideas are fictional, Body is fictional, Mind is a fiction, all emotions, all instincts are fictions. All categories of nature are fictional, and many things are."

I was thinking but no thoughts were coming. 

What is reality?

"This particular moment, this bare, boring, thoughtless reality. Rather reality, uncorrupted by fiction is reality". 

So, Does this mean, Reason is also fiction?

"Yes and no! Reason is a tool of mind. A sort of stick that is used to guess what is and what is not."

"Reason, when used to create and sustain fictions, then it becomes fictional only, Reason, when used to know truth and reality, and discarding fictions, only then is it reality!" 

So, Am I right in saying, Intelligent is one who is trying to unravel what is real, and discarding fictions?

"Yes, He is Gyani."

So, I think Gyani also is a dynamic category. Gyani is not static. A Gyani is a Gyani only when he keeps on striving. The day he stops, he ceases to be. So, the Gyani was not really a Gyani but a fiction. 

Yes. Now you are getting it. 

So, I am intelligent only when I am trying to lift off the weights of imaginations and fictions around me.

He smiled at me. I interpreted it as yes. 

he further said, "So, Your UPSC selection is going to be but an event. Nothing more, nothing less. It ceases to exist one moment after you see your rank, It ceases to be one moment before you see the holy PDF."

And, "What is true is what is right now. Me, at this moment, trying, striving to know, striving to study, is this real?" 

"yes and no".

No?

yes, No!

Why so?

Striving is reality, You are not!

"I am not? Not even in this moment?" 

"You exist as an action of nature. You do not exist as an independent actor. You do not exist as a separate actor than the nature. Nature is what is acting through you and in you. Nature does action on your body. Your body and your mind decided one day that it wants to clear Civil services, and it began. Then, nature pushed a button as if, and action started happening through you. A washing machine started working when pushed button. But did it clean the clothes? Or Dadima did?

"Dadima Did!"

"So, nature does, and nature becomes!" 

I was feeling shattered. It was not sadness, but it was too overwhelming as a statement. I am not. And suddenly it felt I started not being. A kind of psychological melting started to happen. An evaporation of ego. And evaporation causes cooling. My Mind felt cooler. 

He smiled at me as if knowing how I was feeling. 

He said, "Feel it". I will wait. 

I was feeling it. An ecstasy prevailed. 

My curiosity melted. I did not want to know other things. I just wanted to be. It felt Orgasmic. Not the sexual, but something else. Something not material. But it was real. No, it was not. It cannot be. 

I stopped. He was smiling. I was ready after 15 minutes for the last problem. 

 

UPSC GEETA 2: AWAKENING CURIOSITY

 "Will I be able to clear this year's UPSC CSE exam?"

As if he came from future and he knows. As if he is some sort of God and he knows. But I asked because I thought qualifying it is the cure whatever be the intent of doing this. 

He said, "Anything else you want to ask?" 

I thought for some time. I had more questions in mind but in front of him, I felt questionless as if he is the answer to all my questions. 

I said, "No, nothing, just this, if you know please tell me, I am anxious". 

He began. "Why do you want to clear this exam? Why is this exam so much important for you?" 

I answered, "Since, I have left my PhD in between for this, and now I want a job, and also, it aligns with my social world view of welfare, also financially, my family needs this, and it will inspire many students of my hometown to pursue competitive exams". I said all this in a breath thinking he is asking a 250-marker question, and I have to write it within 11 minutes. 

As if he was ready with the answer and he knew what I will say, He said, "So many things, but none is so central that I can pinpoint that is actually beneficial to you". I kept quiet. He went on. 

"Tell me, you used to have a passion for Physics, why did you leave it?" 

"I was not feeling good about it, I felt as if I chose the wrong career path". 

"But why? You lost passion for physics?" 

"The way Physics used to be, it ceased to be that. The campus was not physics friendly". 

"So, you were not lacking in anything?" "Didn't you escape, like a coward?" 

I was facing something very dangerous I had no idea about. He was smiling while saying this. I felt enraged. But I said, "No, I did not. I found another field of interest and changed to that". 

"I think you escaped because you ran away from the pressure and insecurity of being judged on a daily basis." 

I felt helpless. I felt as if he is demolishing all the myths that I always kept for myself. 

He kept going, "Listen, if you genuinely want to know, you will have to start listening to me right now, without defending yourself, surrender your debating skills into me". 

I said, "Ok". 

He started. Listen, "The problem you have has four folds." 

First, what do you think the problem of Akash Madan is? Why is he not getting selected even after this much hard work? He is already much hardworking than you, more focused than you are right now. Why is he not succeeding?" 

"Because UPSC is a hard exam, I think", I said. "That it is, Life itself is hard, Do not see problems in the world, See problems of the self". 

"The problem with Akash Madan is that of Moha.

"But he is the most pragmatic person I know. Who is he attached to?"

"He is attached to himself." 

"But, is not being attached to oneself necessary for being successful?"

"Is your success only important for you? Why is it so valuable to you? When you enlisted reasons for choosing civil services as a career, you described many reasons that were related to public welfare. If that is the case, why attachment?" 

"But, what if I could not clear it? All those visions of the future plans will go in vain." 

"The problem with you and Akash Madan is same on the level of Moha. It seems like you people are so much obsessed by why you should deserve to win, you think it is your birthright. Yes, you have faced hardships, but who has not. Grow out of this negative space of self-obsession and think what you can do to alleviate the pain of the world, that will cure you. Anything, any attempt which is not made in the direction of "good for all" is Adharma. Leave Adharma, come to Dharma. 

"What is this Dharma you are talking about?" 

"First understand the problems" 

"Moha, a Moha with one's own personal ego, personal success". 

Ok. 

Second problem, "Why do you think was the reason for Nikhil's losing hope?" 

I don't know, I do not want to think. May be, he failed that's why. 

"Itni Sthool baatein mat karo yaar, or Don't give such trivial answers, man".

"Nikhil's problem is of Moha, but a different kind of Moha". 

"Nikhil's problem of Moha is that, He has attached his success to the whole world, his family, his society at large, If Akash Madan is too much egocentric, Nikhil's ego is deflated to the whole society". 

"He feels his failure will end the world, but it does not. Failure never ends anything". 

Moha comes in two forms. One is Akash Madan's Moha. The Moha which is egocentric. Everything good should happen to me because I deserve it. Forget the Dharma, I am important, says the Mohi. 

And Second type of Moha is Nikhil's Moha. This Moha is world centric. "Daya", In this the Mohi fills his ego by being generous to others. He thinks he is Boddhisatva. He has bodhisattva complex. he wants to cure the world where he even can't cure himself. 

But you tell me, I feel Nikhil's Moha is justified. Ok, Akash's Moha is egocentric. But, Nikhil's is on the right track, isn't he? We should not think about ourselves, but thinking about the world is ok, right?" I tried reasoning, "and If we cannot do either, where to focus, what even to look at, where to focus?" 

"Anything that makes you a slave of your actions and their outcomes cannot be good for anyone. Wise men do not do action to cure the world, they do it to cure themselves. It is not bad to think about yourself or the world. It matters what you are thinking. If you are thinking that you deserve everything, how to snatch every bit of happiness and material from the world, you are egocentric. If you are thinking how to give to the world and it is making you anxious, you are egocentric. The wise men look both at the world and at themselves. But that look is different." 

"How the wise men look?" I asked. 

"The wise men look at themselves as a battleground or as a fertile land for improvement. The problem with both of your friends and with you is that you identify with yourself so much. That's why this question is asked that what to do. What to help. What to achieve. These achievements are not yours. These achievements are that of the body and the mind. You are not the body or the mind. Nikhil wants to help the world and hence thinks his actions are justified, but he forgets who himself is. He treats himself different from the world. That's why he feels bad when he is not successful. He thinks he could not do good for the world. But the reality is, if he wants to do any good, either He or the world has to be one. and it will be the world helping itself. or He should be empathetic to the whole world. Then also, it will be you helping you. The problem is in dissociating with the world and then trying to attach yourself to the world. Attachment is a sad mimicry of identification. You are supposed to lose yourself in the service of others. Attachment is just a short cut of real losing yourself."

"The wise men keep their focus neither on themselves nor on the world, rather on the truth." 

"The truth, what is it?" 

"First question you asked that is of value." 

"Truth is something that includes both you and the world in a totality." 

"For example, if you want to succeed in UPSC CSE, it is obviously good for you and if you are a good candidate, it will be good for people at large. Don't you think what people welfare and your welfare depends on are the same thing, that is selection of a good candidate and hence, what is truly important? Your selection? or selection of a good candidate?"

"I want to say, a good candidate, but then I feel an uneasiness. I want my success also". 

"There lies your weakness. You cannot say that you do not deserve to get success if you are not a good candidate, here is the selfishness, here lies the ego, that you should be treated differently than the world". 

I kept quiet. 

"If a good candidate's selection is what is good both for you and the world, then your focus should only be on how you become that good candidate, then what is the problem? The truth is this "Good candidature", rest everything is false. Parent's expectations, Your desires, public welfare, everything is maya, Only good candidature is the truth and that should be focused". 

"How did you decide that?" 

"I decided that based on the fact that there is only one criteria of truth, that it should be good for all. It should give Freedom to all." 

"Freedom to all?" 

"Yes, If your focus is on the good candidature, will not you be completely satisfied with the result, since always the most scoring people get selected?" 

"Technically yes" 

"What is this technically yes, conceptually yes, yes is yes. Tell me, what is the problem then? isn't it pure selfishness that you want to be that candidate and if you do not, you think public welfare will not happen?" 

"Should public welfare be public welfare only when it happens through you?" 

I felt as if I was exposed. I felt naked. I said, "tell me then what to do".

"Work with truth in mind, this truth will alleviate from all your and world problems. then You studying will feel like a natural scientific process. It is the world working towards solving its own problems. You working to be an IAS will become the world working to heal itself. Your working will become like Photosynthesis, Like respiration, Like a state election, Like Nitrogen Cycle. And then, Let the best get selected, No need of sadness over failure, the best has been selected." 

I felt as if something heavy bas been lifted off my back. 

a feeling of calm gestured on my face. Suddenly, He said, "Problem is not over yet. Two more problems are left" 

"What are those problems?" 

He was smiling at me. As if, he was successful in doing what he wanted to. I know what he wanted to do. He wanted to make me develop interest that he is of some help to me. Honestly, I thought, He is going too deep and this might not help me. But it did. I am curious now. I think, this is going to solve all my problems and not just personal or professional. My Curiosity has been awakened.