Politicians & Religion

Politicians cynically use the race or religion in order to further their political agendas and to validate the separation of people along ethnic and religious lines. Political and religious con artists are able to get people to associate their religious faith with particular individuals, thus transferring that faith to the individual political or religious leader.

This allows that person to achieve a greater control over others than would otherwise be possible

Through the advent of globalisation and the Internet, various cultures all around the world, including Malaysia, are starting to assimilate each other's values. Malaysians are beginning to consider themselves as citizens of the world, and no longer view themselves as a particular ethnic race.

For that reason, the government is turning its sight to religion as the next powerful tool to control its people. In a land where most of its population is obsessed with symbolism and idolism, religion is a very powerful tool to ignite a crisis between the various groups of people in the country. Thus we see our self-righteous leaders in various states scrambling for the honour to become holier than the leader of the next state.

What should be done about it?

The solution is obvious.Preserving the best of state and religion requires that the two be separated.

Religion and morality should remain as the personal responsibility of an individual. The government should not dictate how a person prays, or practice his or her religion. A government’s duty is just to administer the country to ensure a peaceful and harmonious atmosphere throughout. Only the well-learned religious leaders should handle religious matters.

However, it is sad nowadays to note that there are some dubious religious leaders who also double up as politicians and conversely, there are politicians who also put on religious apparel. These two figures will not allow the rest of us to privately discover the beauty of our own religion. These are the two characters who will always highlight the differences between the various religions but diligently attempt to hide their similarities.

If a society is able to sustain a government that is basically secular, isn't this because there is too little religious action to animate its politics significantly? Put oppositely, when any society's politics become religiously infected, how can its state structures be sufficiently inoculated to resist the virus?

There need be no limits to the free exercise of religion in politics as long as there is a strict prohibition of any religious establishment within the state. Politicians, as politicians, may campaign on - and even vote - their religious consciences; nor is there anything to prevent them from bowing to the bidding of their religious organizations. But state officials and state administrations have a different responsibility. They must remain formally and functionally neutral, and not only in the pluralistic fray between religions but also in the larger struggle between religion, on the one hand, and secularism, on the other. The overall result should be a necessarily contested but vital politics framed by an equitable state that rises above the fray to guarantee fairness to all.

For example, India's recently increasing communal violence reflects the tendency for state leaders and state structures to become embroiled in religious conflicts. As concessions made to one group require concessions made to its rival. Constructing state policy has come to resemble shortening a chair one leg at a time: the results are never quite even, and the seat of power becomes increasingly unstable. The assassinations of both Indira and Rajiv Gandhi offer tragic reminders of the possible consequences.

Meanwhile, over the last ten years or so, if we look at the key sources of violence, vacuity, vulnerability and vitality by examining the present and tending relations between religion, politics, we could find one thing in common. This variety involves the very different relations between religion and politics, on the one hand, and religion and the state, on the other. Few will be surprised to learn that campaigning politicians everywhere tend to invoke local religious themes and symbols as sources of legitimacy what is called "cultural power".

What may be more surprising is the frequent tendency for governmental regimes and their officials to try to keep religion at arm's length. While religion is often an ally in the pursuit of power, once power has been secured, religion can become an unwelcome constraint in the quite different processes of state administration.

Consider the case of Israel. Many Israelis would protest its categorization as a religious state, arguing that Zionism itself can be seen as a secular movement, and that the state makes ample provision for both secular practices and various non-Judaic faiths, especially Islamic and Christian. At the same time, there is no question that the Israeli state is perceived as Jewish by most Jews and non-Jews alike. Even if this were not the case, Zionism itself may be a sufficiently sacred commitment to qualify as religious in its own terms. Certainly there is no question that Israeli politics often take religious forms. This not only applies to the participation of Muslim Palestinians, including the Hamas, but also to the struggles among various Jewish groups - whether secularists on the left or contesting movements on the right, such as the Gush Emunim and the ultra-orthodox Haredi. As Yitzhak Rabin's assassination makes clear, the stakes are large and the rates of violence are correspondingly high.

Where are we heading to? We need to look in to it seriously.

********************************************************************************

Politicians need not abandon religion

By Barack Obama for USA TODAY

My faith shapes my values, but applying those values to policymaking must be done with principles that are accessible to all people, religious or not. Even so, those who enter the public square are not required to leave their beliefs at the door.

For some time now, there has been talk among pundits and pollsters that the political divide in this country falls sharply along religious lines. Indeed, the single biggest gap in party affiliation among white Americans today is not between men and women, between red states and blue, but between those who attend church regularly and those who don't.

This gap has long been exploited by conservative leaders such as Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, who tell evangelical Christians that Democrats disrespect their values and dislike their church, while suggesting that religious Americans care only about issues such as abortion and gay marriage.

It's a gap that has also been kept open by some liberals, who might try to avoid the conversation about their religious values altogether, fearful of offending anyone and claiming that constitutional principles tie their hands. Some might even dismiss religion in the public square as inherently irrational or intolerant, thinking that the very word "Christian" describes one's political opponents, not people of faith.

And yet, despite all this division, we are united by the fact that Americans are a deeply religious people. Ninety percent of us believe in God, 70% affiliate ourselves with an organized religion, and 38% call ourselves committed Christians.

This is why, if political leaders truly hope to communicate our hopes and values to Americans in a way that's relevant to their own, we cannot abandon the field of religious discourse.

My lesson

I've fallen into this trap myself. During my 2004 Senate race, my opponent said, "Jesus Christ would not vote for Barack Obama." I answered with what has come to be the typically liberal response: that we live in a pluralistic society, and that I can't impose my religious views on another. I said I was running to be the U.S. senator of Illinois, and not the minister of Illinois.
But my opponent's accusations nagged at me, and I knew that my answer didn't address the role my faith has in guiding my values. I, like other progressives, should have realized that when we ignore what it means to be a good Christian or Muslim or Jew, when we discuss religion only in the negative sense of where or how it should not be practiced, when we shy away from religious venues because we think we'll be unwelcome, others will fill the vacuum: those with the most insular views of faith, or those who cynically use religion to justify partisan ends.

Moreover, it's wrong to ask believers to leave their religion at the door before entering the public square. Abraham Lincoln, William Jennings Bryan, Martin Luther King Jr. — indeed, the majority of great reformers in American history — were not only motivated by faith, they also used religious language to argue for their cause. To say men and women should not inject their "personal morality" into policy debates is a practical absurdity; our law is by definition a codification of morality.

If progressives shed some of these biases, we might recognize the overlapping values that both religious and secular people share when it comes to the direction of our country. We might recognize that the call to sacrifice, the need to think in terms of "thou" and not just "I," resonates with all Americans. And we might realize that we have the ability to reach out to the evangelical community and engage millions of religious Americans in the larger project of America's renewal.
But the conservative leaders of the religious right will need to acknowledge a few truths about religion as well.

For one, the separation of church and state in America has preserved not only our democracy but also the robustness of our religious practice. After all, during our founding, it was not the civil libertarians who were the most effective champions of this separation; it was the persecuted religious minorities concerned that any state-sponsored religion might hinder their ability to practice their faith.

Universal values

This separation is critical to our form of government because in the end, democracy demands that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal, rather than religion-specific, values. It requires that their proposals be subject to argument, and amenable to reason. If I am opposed to abortion for religious reasons but seek to pass a law banning the practice, I cannot simply point to the teachings of my church. I have to explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all.
This might be difficult for those who believe in the inerrancy of the Bible, but in a pluralistic democracy, we have no choice. Politics involves compromise, the art of the possible. But religion does not allow for compromise. To base one's life on such uncompromising commitments may be sublime; to base our policymaking on them would be dangerous.
In the months and years to come, I am hopeful we can bridge these gaps and overcome the prejudices each of us brings to this debate. I believe that Americans want this. No matter how religious they may or may not be, people are tired of seeing faith used as a tool to attack and divide.

Americans are looking for a deeper, fuller conversation about religion in this country. They might not change their positions on certain issues, but they are willing to listen and learn from those who are willing to speak in reasonable terms — those who know of the central and awesome place that God holds in the lives of so many, and who refuse to treat faith as simply another political issue with which to score points.


Compiled by Vineeth

Diversity-worship won’t cure racism but …

It has now become an accepted principle that the way to cure racism is through the promulgation of racial and ethnic diversity within corporations, universities, government agencies and other institutions including political parties. There are many facets for these diversity movements such as NS training, diversity hiring and admissions, diversity promotions, diversity politics and diversity accommodations etc. (e.g., Indian/Chinese/Malay student organizations and facilities at universities.MIC, MCA, UMNO in politics).

The common feature in all these facets is racial preference.

Why this diversity has brought racial division and conflict instead of promoting racial harmony, if diversity was the cure?

The answer is that you cannot cure racism with racism. Accepting this logic of diversity is same as thinking in racial terms rather than in terms of individual character or merit. Taking jobs away from one group in order to compensate a second group to correct injustices/imbalance caused by a third group who mistreated/sidelined a fourth group at an earlier point in history is absurd on the face of it and does not promote justice. It rather does the opposite. Singling out one group for special favors (e.g., through affirmative action/NEP) breeds justified resentment and fuels the prejudices of real racists.

“People are individuals”

Let’s take a fictional example in the field of job as a case study. A corporation named ALIBABA since its creation since 1953 refused to hire an Indian due to a quirky bias on the part of its founder. The founder then dies in 1969 and an enlightened Board of Directors decides that something "positive" needs to be done to compensate for past injustices and announces that, henceforth, Indians will be hired on a preferential basis.

Observe that:

• This does not help the real victims - the previously excluded Indians.

• The newly favoured Indians have not been victims of discrimination in hiring, yet unfairly benefit from it.

• The non-Indians are now excluded from jobs due to the Indians preference.

• These non-Indians did not cause the previous discrimination and are now unfairly made victims of it.

In the job sphere there are only three essential things an employer needs to know about an individual applicant:

> Does the person have the relevant ability and knowledge (or the capacity to learn readily)?

> Is the person willing to exert the needed effort?

> Does the person have good character? e.g., honesty, integrity

Similar concept is applicable in other sectors including education (which is in greater mess) & politics (which is a mockery now).

The proper solution, of course, is simply to stop discriminating based on irrelevant factors. Although Indian bias ( in the above fictional example) is not a social problem, the principle does not change when you replace hair color with skin color or religion.

Color-blindness & religion-blindness is the traditional and essentially correct solution to the problem of racism & religiosity. But this well-intentioned principle comes at the issue negatively.

The correct principle is individuality awareness…………

People often are making judgments of other people based on non-essential attributes such as skin color, gender, religion, nationality, etc. of course, does happen. At the same time, Individuality Awareness might be too "idealistic" too, But the solution is not to abandon the ideal but to implement it consistently. Thus, government and organizational policies should focus not on diversity-worship but to find way on how to objectively assess or measure the ability, motivation and character in other people.

The proper alternative is to focus on the individual and to treat each individual according to his or her own merits. Malaysians have always encouraged the concept of diversity. ONE of which could easily be reflected in your news papers. (just go through politics till vacancies, could see it everywhere)

When one condemns racism, they should practice what they preach. Malaysians should abhor racism, in any form, for the same reason. (Our parliament itself fails in that)

The belief - that you can cure racism with racial quotas - is a hopeless quest with nothing but increased conflict and injustice at the end. Time has reached where political leaders, educationalists and corporate leaders should find the courage to assert and defend the only true antidote to the problem of racism, which is INDIVIDUALISM. Diversity-worship won’t cure racism but individualism will.

- Vineeth Menon

“Astrology” - One of the way of fixing the blame and finding solution

Astrology has attracted human-interest since time immemorial. But in modern times astrology is more and more related to religion. Religion and spiritualism has nothing to do with it. Is it a form of job opportunity development?

Overview

The astrology basically is related to prediction of future events. The accuracy of these predictions is not validated and no astrologer would ever highlight his failures.

Now by declaring that the future events are already decided, these astrologers cast serious aspersions over the intellect of human beings. The most obvious question is that why a man should possess intellect when whatever he thinks and subsequently does is predestined. It is this possession of intellect that makes humans superior to other animals.

The life of animals may be predestined because of lack of intellect due to limitations of the body but it certainly can't be the case with humans.

Working Principle

Astrologers claim that by knowing the future beforehand, a man can work better and can avoid certain future mishaps or perhaps decrease it's intensity.

The question is that if the future is decided than how can it be modified? The astrologers contradict themselves on this point. It opens the possibility of unscrupulous astrologers taking people for a ride.

Example: An astrologer reads the horoscope of a person and finds out that the person might suffer a loss of RM.100. But he tells his client that he would suffer a loss of RM.500 and if he undertakes certain remedies his loss would be decreased to RM.100.

If in future the loss turns out to be RM.100, then the astrologer would not only take the accolades for correct prediction but also make good money.

We have to appreciate that if future can be changed then it is not predestined

If can't be changed then there is no need for anyone to do any work, since everything will happen on its own.

Religion is not related to Astrology

The most important point, which clearly proves that astrology is just a school of thought, which has no religious sanction, is that none of the spiritual incarnations and other saints has ever mentioned astrology in their sermons,unless proven otherwise.

Leave alone astrology, they have even condemned occult and other psychic powers since they make a man weak and deviate him from the path of God. Perhaps the greatest crime that the astrologers have done to man is that they have made a mess of the greatest teaching of in the Bhagavad-Gita.

Lord Krishna says in Gita, "Your right is to work alone and not to the fruits thereof".

But the astrologers discuss the fruits of the action even before the action has taken place. They first discuss fruits and then suggest actions, which contradicts the celebrated teachings of Lord Krishna.

“The man who believes in astrology can never have faith in God and if someone has faith in God he would never believe in astrology and other related fields.”

Swami Vivekananda said, "Astrology and all these mystical things are generally signs of a weak mind; therefore as soon as they are becoming prominent in our minds, we should see a physician, take good food and rest."

And the new entry into the daily life of Malaysians is now numerology.

Its you choice to whom do you believe, either you believe in yourself(your intellect) with faith in god or believe in other forces.

Whom do you believe? GOD or Astrologer

- Vineeth Menon

Rise above racism towards respect and tolerance in Malaysian society

The media was pushing the idea of “racism” or race-baiting in the election.

Malaysians have shown they are disgusted with racism and race-baiting. Malaysians have moved beyond the race or gender of a person as a hindrance to vote for a candidate, as it should be. Today, we have people of all races positioned every where & supporting each other irrespective of religious affiliation. So, was opposition Racist? I don’t think so.

It is not racist to vote against a candidate because of their politics, views and ideology. Race,Religion & Peace is an excuse used by some, because it does not deserve an explanation. It does not need one.

After the tragic setback, the race based parties like MIC & MCA are trying to reincarnate itself. Should they be allowed to grow again to cause racial disharmony and keep the people divided in the name of Race? These leaders are now finding difficulty to persuade people in terms of race. Isn’t that how it is supposed to be?

This universe has not been created by any extra-cosmic God, nor is it the work of any outside genius. It is self-creating, self-dissolving, self-manifesting, One Infinite Existence. Liberty of thought and action is the only condition of life, of growth and well-being. Where it does not exist, the man, the race, the nation must go.

No individual or nation can live by holding itself apart from the community of others, and wherever such an attempt has been made under false ideas of greatness, policy or holiness-the result has always been disastrous to the secluding one....

Malaysian Society is now at the cross roads of socio-political reformation after 50 years of independence .Our problems are complex because we have willfully accepted a diverse society of all religions, cultures and habits of living. The aspirations of the people are growing with the changing environment. Our society has become more open in recent times because of rapid growth in communication and all round development. It is but natural that this gap in meeting the aspirations is leading to problems of all types including race & religion.

Race & religion is truly a weapon of some nefarious short sighted persons to gain unfair and undue advantage over other fellow citizens. A question, MCA & MIC is raced party or not?

We can overcome the disease of racism by one or more of the following methods.

Racism originates when we ourselves create differences. First, we all must learn to identify ourselves as Malaysians instead of Indian, Chinese etc. “What we do, so we become”. Also has to stop using the words like "preferable chinese speaking" "bumis are encouraged to apply" in the advertisements.No matter what ones explanation for use of these words is, its final result is segregation.

The entire race based political parties like MIC, MCA must be eliminated as they will only help to maintain or increase racist mentality than eliminating it.

Our enlightened religious teachers should come forward to teach that all religions are the means of achieving the same end. When there are no differences in religions, how can differentiation in followers come? Today a large part of racism is linked to religion.

Create societal norms which strictly shun racism of any kind. It should be totally unacceptable at all levels. Unfortunately many of our leaders themselves are falling into a trap to this racism for quick and immediate gains.

Children are the torch bearers of Malaysia’s future. They should be taught in schools and colleges to be humanistic and be tolerant to others views. Every person is free to express his opinion and be a part of the Nation building process. This must be inculcated in the minds of children at a young age so that it blossoms when they grow. Are all our schools doing this?

Our national character must reflect anti -racism of any sort happening anywhere in the world. Unfortunately this is not happening today. We only reflect when anything goes against one religion. Typical example is the reaction to the Dutch movie. Dutch move cannot be justified, at the same time; we are forgetting to condemn similar behavior of other nations and our leaders irrespective of Religion, Color & Creed.Do you think, the move by one supermarket to protest dutch is genuine? According to me,its the similar stunt of BN to cash in on religion to boost their sales further.Just using the opportunity. Let it be.

Media has to take an active roll in propagating Bangsa Malaysia spirit.Any adavertisements which promotes racial segregation in the name of religion or race should be totally avoided.By saying so, this dosent mean that one should not promote ones religion.Its said to avoid segregation in terms of jobs,education and others of similar nature.

I have firm faith that Malaysia with diversity in culture will go through this period successfully.

-Vineeth Menon

Man – Evolution - Religion

OUT OF WHAT HAS THIS universe been produced then? From a preceding fine universe. Out of what has man been produced? The preceding fine form. Out of what has the tree been produced? Out of the seed; the whole of the tree was there in the seed. It comes out and becomes manifest.

So, the whole of this universe has been created out of this very universe existing in a minute form. It has been made manifest now. It will go back to that minute form, and again will be made manifest. Now we find that the fine forms slowly come out and become grosser and grosser until they reach their limit, and when they reach their limit they go back further and further, becoming finer and finer again. This coming out of the fine and becoming gross, simply changing the arrangements of its parts, as it were, is what in modern times is called evolution.

This is very true, perfectly true; we see it in our lives. No rational man can possibly quarrel with these evolutionists. But we have to learn one thing more. We have to go one step further, and what is that? That every evolution is preceded by an involution. The seed is the father of the tree, but another tree was itself the father of the seed. The seed is the fine form out of which the big tree comes, and another big tree was the form which is involved in that seed. The whole of this universe was present in the cosmic fine universe. The little cell, which becomes afterwards the man, was simply the involved man and becomes evolved as a man. If this is clear, we have no quarrel with the evolutionists, for we see that if they admit this step, instead of their destroying religion, they will be the greatest supporters of it.

We see then, that nothing can be created out of nothing. Everything exists through eternity, and will exist through eternity. Only the movement is in succeeding waves and hollows, going back to fine forms, and coming out into gross manifestations. This involution and evolution is going on throughout the whole of nature. The whole series of evolution, beginning with the lowest manifestation of life and reaching up to the highest, the most perfect man, must have been the involution of something else.

The question is: The involution of what? What was involved? God. The evolutionist will tell you that your idea that it was God is wrong. Why? Because you see God is intelligent, but we find that intelligence develops much later on in the course of evolution. It is in man and the higher animals that we find intelligence, but millions of years have passed in this world before this intelligence came.

This objection of the evolutionists does not hold water, as we shall see by applying our theory. The tree comes out of the seed; goes back to the seed; the beginning and the end are the same. The earth comes out of its cause and returns to it. We know that if we can find the beginning we can find the end. Reverse, if we find the end we can find the beginning. If that is so, take this whole evolutionary series, from the protoplasm at one end to the perfect man at the other, and this whole series is one life. In the end we find the perfect man, so in the beginning it must have been the same. Therefore, the protoplasm was the involution of the highest intelligence. You may not see it but that involved intelligence is what is uncoiling itself until it becomes manifested in the most perfect man.

That can be mathematically demonstrated. If the law of conservation of energy is true, you cannot get anything out of a machine unless you put it in there first. The amount of work that you get out of an engine is exactly the same as you have put into it in the form of water and coal, neither more nor less. The work I am doing now is just what I put into me, in the shape of air, food, and other things. It is only a question of change and manifestation. There cannot be added in the economy of this universe one particle of matter or one foot-pound of force, nor can one particle of matter or one foot-pound of force be taken out.

If that be the case, what is this intelligence? If it was not present in the protoplasm, it must have come all of a sudden, something coming out of nothing, which is absurd. It, therefore, follows absolutely that the perfect man, the free man, the God-man, who has gone beyond the laws of nature and transcended everything, who has no more to go through this process of evolution, through birth and death, that man called the "Christ-man" by the Christians, and the "Buddha-man" by the Buddhists, and the "Free" by the Yogis—that perfect man who is at one end of the chain of evolution—was involved in the cell of the protoplasm, which is at the other end of the same chain.

Applying the same reason to the whole of the universe, we see that intelligence must be the Lord of creation, the cause. What is the most evolved notion that man has of this universe? It is intelligence, the adjustment of part to part, and the display of intelligence, of which the ancient design theory was an attempt at expression. The beginning was, therefore, intelligence. At the beginning that intelligence becomes involved, and in the end that intelligence gets evolved. The sum total of the intelligence displayed in the universe must, therefore, be the involved universal intelligence unfolding itself. This universal intelligence is what we call God.

Call it by any other name, it is absolutely certain that in the beginning there is that Infinite cosmic intelligence. This cosmic intelligence gets involved, and it manifests, evolves itself, until it becomes the perfect man, the "Christ-man," the "Buddha-man." Then it goes back to its own source. That is why all the scriptures say, "In Him we live and move and have our being." That is why all the scriptures preach that we come from God and go back to God. This cosmic intelligence is what the theologians call God.

"Why do you use that old word, God?" Because it is the best word for our purpose; you cannot find a better word than that, because all the hopes, aspirations, and happiness of humanity have been centered in that word. It is impossible now to change the word. Words like these were first coined by great saints who realized their importance and understood their meaning. But in current society, ignorant people take these words, and the result is that they lose their spirit and glory. The word God has been used from time immemorial, and the idea of this cosmic intelligence, and all that is great and holy, is associated with it. Use the old word, only use it in the true spirit, cleanse it of superstition, and realize fully what this great ancient word means.

If you understand the power of the laws of association, you will know that these words are associated with innumerable majestic and powerful ideas; they have been used and worshipped by millions of human souls and associated by them with all that is highest and best, all that is rational, all that is lovable, and all that is great and grand in human nature. And they come as suggestions of these associations and cannot be given up.

We now see that all the various forms of cosmic energy, such as matter, thought, force, intelligence and so forth, are simply the manifestations of that cosmic intelligence, or, as we shall call it henceforth, the Supreme Lord. Everything that you see, feel, or hear, the whole universe, is His creation, or to be a little more accurate, is His projection; or to be still more accurate, is the Lord Himself. It is He who is shining as the sun and the stars, He is the mother earth. He is the ocean Himself. He comes as gentle showers, He is the gentle air that we breathe in, and He it is who is working as force in the body. He is the speech that is uttered; He is the man who is talking. He is the audience that is here. He is the platform on which I stand; He is the light that enables me to see your faces. It is all He. He Himself is both the material and the efficient cause of this universe, and He it is that gets involved in the minute cell, and evolves at the other end and becomes God again. He it is that comes down and becomes the lowest atom, and slowly unfolding His nature, rejoins Himself. This is the mystery of the universe.

"Thou art the man, Thou art the woman, Thou art the strong man walking in the pride of youth, Thou art the old man tottering on crutches, Thou art in everything. Thou art everything, O Lord." This is the only solution of the Cosmos that satisfies the human intellect. In one word, we are born of Him, we live in Him, and unto Him we return.

Read more in “The Cosmos: The Macrocosm - The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda”

"The whole object of the religion is, by constant struggle, to become perfect, to become divine, to reach God, and see God. . . . Every religion is evolving a God out of the material man, and the same God is the inspirer of all of them." These words were spoken by the great Indian sage Swami Vivekananda to the Parliament of World's Religions in 1893. So striking is the impact of Swami Vivekananda's words

Swami Vivekananda said:

Taking for granted that Darwin is right, I cannot yet admit that it is the final conclusion about the causes of evolution. I am of opinion that the conclusion of the ancient Indian philosophers is the last word on the causes of evolution.

You are certainly aware of the laws of struggle for existence, survival of the fittest, natural selection, and so forth, which have been held by the Western scholars to be the causes of elevating a lower species to a higher." It is not that this is done by the constant struggle against obstacles. In my opinion, struggle and competition sometimes stand in the way of a being's attaining its perfection. If the evolution of an animal is affected by the destruction of a thousand others, then one must confess that this evolution is doing very little good to the world.

The attempt to remove evil from the world by killing a thousand evil-doers only adds to the evil in the world. But if the people can be made to desist from evil-doing by means of spiritual instruction, there is no more evil in the world. Now, see how horrible the Western struggle theory becomes!

-Vineeth Menon