Wednesday, 12 March 2008

Good, bad and evil

What is good and what is bad or evil is not a question of today, it is as old a question as the world itself. I came across an interview of certain top ranking religious heads besides Shri Ravi Shankar and Shahrukh Khan, the most popular film actor on this question. The versions of interpretations on the subject were varying but interesting. Books on mythology are full of references on the topic read, interpreted and reinterpreted by eminent scholars but the very question still remains like it was in the beginning. Bhagwati Charan Verma, the author of 'Chitralekha', the book that made him a giant amongst writers overnight, chose this very theme for his novel. What is Paap (evil) is the question Chitralekha asks a Guru leaving him non plussed. Mahatma Gandhi's three monkeys are well known the world over, the three who teach that ...don't talk ill, don't see bad, don't hear wrong. Lord Budha's teachings are all on that count only. Take any religious leader, they invariably cover this question as topic of their sermons. Shahrukh opted to answer this question based on his convenience. His version was that there is nothing wrong in acquiring massive wealth or lead a luxurious life with the caution that a person should not get attached to these things. This again is too vague an answer in the sense that there is hardly anything like enjoying it and disowning it in the meantime. The precepts contained in Bhagwat Gita are all centred around this theme only.

Infact the very system on earth is the combination of both good and bad and wherever there are divine intentions there are evil designs too. Good and bad both exist parallel to each other. Where there is God, there is also Satan. The pertinent aspect of which hardly any notice is taken is that Satan himself is only the part of God Himself. Moreover, no definition of this topic was ever given by any one which was uniform. It keeps on

Technorati Tags: , , , , shahrukhkhan

changing. From age to age the definitions given and interpretations made are found to be highly conflicting for the reason that these things were all based on the life pattern that obtained at a particular stage of time. All religions talk of causing no harm to others. In practice this is not what they actually do. Certain religions are there to justify killings. These very people develop their food habits, some are vegetarians and some are there to be non vegetarians. Non vegetarians in many cases are those not lagging behind in talking of love for animals and birds. How come it could stand the truth. You love a bird but you kill it, or some one else does the job for you, you are not for harming any live being but you kill a goat or other animals to satisfy your taste. The question is difficult but the answers to this given by preachers are more grotesque and anomalous.

Post a Comment

addy-2