Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
who is wise and who is conversant with Virtue, Pleasure and Wealth: the king who is voluptuous,
partial and deceitful, on the other hand, is destroyed by the same danda which he inflicts: when
the king swerves from his duty (dharma), danda strikes him down with his relatives and his
kingdom, and more, it afflicts the whole world and likewise the gods and the sages. Regarding
the rulers qualifications, the author remarks that danda cannot be inflicted justly by one without
assistants or a fool or a covetous man, or one whose mind is unimproved, or one who is addicted
to sensual pleasures, while it can be justly inflicted by one who is pure and truthful, who acts
according to the canon; who has good assistants and who is wise.
GAUTAM BUDDHA
EARLY LIFE
The Buddha was born in 563 B.C. as Siddhartha to Shuddhodana the king of Kapilavastu in
Nepal. His mother Mayadevi expired when he was just 7 days old and he was brought up by his
stepmother UauUiim. Siddhartha was made to lead a very sheltered life as the astrologers had
predicted that he would give up worldly pleasures to follow a different path. The King wanted to
avoid this at all costs and so did not let him out of the palace. He hoped that Siddhartha would
one day become king.
M.K. GANDIHI
GANDHI: THE WORSHIPPER OF THE SOUL
The great man is one who makes others great and who cames with L him the burden of the whole
humanity. The greatest fact in the history of man on earth is not what he achieves materially or
what he gains here, but the growth of his Soul from age to age in its search for truth. Those who
take part in this adventure of the Soul secure an ever-lasting place 111 world history.
The greatness of Gandhi lies not in his heroic struggle for Indias freedom, bin in his ever
striving for the Soul-force and in his insistence on the creative power of the Soul.
From the Gandhian application of socialism, however, it must none thought that Gandhi was a
mystic or his socialism was only a matter of the mind. He was intensely practical and his
principle was that the life of the individual should get all possible expression only in the context
of society. He added to this the possibility of application of non-violence and truth in all
activities and thought. Gandhian idea in general and Gandhian socialism in particular is no mere
theory, not merely an intellectual grasp or philosophical satisfaction which can be attained by
simple speculation and thinking. The most particular and significant aspect of Gandhian
socialism is the emphasis which Gandhi laid on the internal aspect of life.
JWAHARLAL NEHRU
NEHRU: BIRTH AND CIRCUMSTANCES
Nature and circumstance were both kind to Jawaharlal Nehru. He was bom into the Kashmiri
Brahmin community, the must aristocratic suh-casie in the Hindu social system. His father was a
distinguished and wealthy barrister, modem, urbane, highly cultivated and lavishly generous.
As an only son-and the only child for eleven years-Jawaharlal was the focus of concentrated
affection. He had. too. the leisure and learning of an English aristocrat in the secure atmosphere
of the Edwardian Age-private tutors, Harrow. Cambridge and the Inner Temple. When he was
drawn to the political arena soon after his return to India, his path was eased by the guidance and
support of his father and Gandhi. Prime Minister Nehru recalled this head-start in a modest
portrait of his past seen forty years later. growth to public prominence, you know, was not by
sharp stages. It was, rather, a steady development over a long period of time. And if I may say
so, he added dryly, I began at fairly high level. The benefits of aristocratic background and
higher Western education were not without price. Security was accompanied by an
overwhelming paternalism which hindered his growth to self-reliance. This tendency to depend
on a strong, decisive and older man a marked feature of Nehrus character in his adult life. Even
before the death of his father in 1931 he had already transferred this dependence in large measure
to Gandhi, who served as guide, counsellor and father-confessor in matters both political and
personal. After Gandhis death the habit continued but in a less pronounced manner. Indeed, it
was not until his early sixties that Nehru emerged mostly from the shadow of the two men who
exercised more influence on his character than all other persons.
Nehrus education in England accounted for his realistic approach to the problems of life and his
scientific attitude of mind. He would fight for his countrys freedom against the British rulers in
India, but he could not forget what he owed to his English training or ways of thought.
Personally I owe too much to England in my mental make, up ever to feel wholly alien to her,
he frankly avowed, and do what I will, I cannot get rid of the habits of mind, and the standards
and the ways of judging other countries as well as life generally, which I acquired at school and
college in England. It is this again that made him realize how much English language and
literature have meant to India and her people, though he was a passionate believer in the
resurgence of the Indian languages and in their replacing English in the near future. Nor did he
forget the deep debt of gratitude that Mahatma Gandhi and Aurobindo Ghosh, Rabindranafh
Tagore and Radhakrishnan owe to English or that they drew their inspiration as much from
teachings of Burke and Mill, Ruskin and Tolstoy, Lincoln and Thoreau as from the Vedas and the
Upanishads, the Ramayana and the Mahabharata, the Bhagvad-Gita and the gospel of Buddha.
He always impressed on his countrymen the need for a spirit of restraint in the solution of
problems, both at home and abroad; his success in this direction had enabled him to see that
India continues to be a member of the Commonwealth.
Patriotism is no longer enough; we want something higher, wider and nobler. A lover of his
country, proud of her past, eagerly looking forward to an equally splendid future for her, he was
no narrow nationalist as most politicians and patriots tend to become. To him the whole of
humanity was one; the denial of freedom to a people whether in Indonesia or in Israel, made him
take up their cause with the same fervour with which he fought for Indias freedom. What are
we interested in world affairs for ? he asked. We seek no domination over any country. We do
not wish to interfere in the affairs of any country, domestic or other. Our main stake in world
affairs is peace, to see that there is racial equality and that people who are still subjugated should
be free. For the rest we do not desire to interfere in world affairs and we do not desire that other
people should interfere in our affairs.
A man of wide vision and broad outlook, Nehru did not subscribe to the doctrine that the end
justifies the means. He writes that a worthy end should have worthy means leading up to it. That
seems not only a good ethical doctrine, but sound practical politics, for the means that are not
good often defeat the end in view and raise new problems and difficulties. And then it appears so
unbecoming, so degrading to the self-respect of an individual or a nation to submit to such
means, to go through the mire. Again and again Nehru told his audiences, both in India and
abroad, that this principle of right means Jeadin.fi up to right results should be adopted in
international relations also.
It is a truism of history that democracy is the best form of government, because it preserves the
highest human values. That is why, India has chosen democracy. And Nehru was so hopeful
about its success in India that he remarked. We will resist the imposition of any other concept
here or any other practice. But he quite reasonably thought, as we all think, that war puts an end
to the very values that democracy cherishes. It was his firm belief that democracy, in fact, is a
casuaty of war in the world today. It does not mean to function properly any more. That has been
the tragedy of the last two World wars and something infinitely worse is likely to happen if there
is another war.
JAYAPRAKASH NARAYAN
BIRTH AND THE IDEAL OF FREEDOM
Jayaprakash Narayan, born in a middle-class family of Bihar, received his education both in
India and U. S. A. While still a young boy, he became an ardent nationalist and leaned towards
the revolutionary cult of which Bengal was the noble leader at that time. But before his
revolutionary leanings could mature. Gandhis first non-cooperation movement swept over the
land as a strangely uplifting hurricane. He had an unusual experience of soaring up with the
winds of a great idea.
While under the spell of Marxism, J. P. Narayan was much impressed by the Marxian philosophy
of revolution. It seemed to him a surer and quicker road to the freedom of a country and the
emancipation of its masses than Gandhis technique of civil disobedience and non-cooperation.
The thrilling triumph of the great Lenin in Russia, accounts of which he consumed with
unsatiated hunger, seemed to establish beyond doubt the supremacy of the Marxian way to
revolution. Also, Marxism stood, he felt, for equality and brotherhood-the qualities without
which freedom is not enough. He interpreted the word freedom and showed his leaning:
towards Marxism in the following lines: . It must mean freedom for all-even the lowliest-and
this freedom must include freedom from exploitation, from hunger, from poverty. I cannot say
what were the early experiences that had laid the foundations in the subconscious mind of
sympathy with poverty and suffering. But the latent sympathy certainly was there, and it was
awakened and brought to ill the surface of conscious living by Marxism. At this time he was not
very certain about Gandhis stand on the vital question of equality which captivated him as much
as the ideal of freedom.
AS A SOCIALIST
For nearly twenty-four years, from 1930 to 1954, Narayan worked as a socialist. He had been the
foremost leader, propagandist and spokesman of Indian socialism. Mahatma Gandhi had
accepted him to be the greatest Indian authority on socialism. He not only took the initiative in
the formation of the Indian Socialist Party in 1934, but also showed a remarkable genius in
popularizing the party and its programme.
In 1934, Jayaprakash Narayan realized that socialism could be the real basis of Indias freedom.
In a resolution submitted to the Ramgarh Congress of 1940, he advocated collective ownership
and control of all large-scale and heavy production. He moved that the state should nationalize
heavy transport, shipping, mining and the heavy industries. As such, his earlier socialism showed
an impact of the ideas of American and British socialists.
He writes in his book. From Socialism to Sarvodaya, recapitulating his old impressions about
Russia, the home of communism: The Russian revolution had started as a peoples revolution
mat had the active support of the broad masses of Czarist Russia, but Lenin converted it into a
minority revolution when he forcibly dissolved the Constituent Assembly in which he was in a
small minority and seized power with the help of rebel soldiers and the urban working class.
The subsequent miscarriage of the revolution and distortion of socialism to my mind was the
direct result of a forcible seizure of power by a minority.
As a socialist, he believed in the urgency of economic problems of the country, and he, therefore,
stressed the need for solving the economic problem first. There is no apparent inevitable
connection between economic causation and cultural reality. But it is also true that without the
satisfaction of basic economic needs cultural creativism is a sheer impossibility.
Hence Jayaprakash pleaded for the eager maintenance of the conditions that were indispensable
for the realization of equality of opportunities. Thus economic minimum is a prime precondition
for the resplendence of the fruits of culture.
COMMITMENT TO SARVODAYA
Jayaprakash completely broke away with Marxism and turned to Sarvodaya philosophy. He
attempted to reinterpret the basic-question of individual behaviour that he was to exhibit in the
realm of politics from an ethical viewpoint. The study of matter is an objective exploration,
whereas that of consciousness is subjective realization.
The study of matter, the objective exploration, science in short, is necessarily amoral. The
Marxists (and the materialists generally), having reduced consciousness to a behaviour of matter,
naturally knocked the bottom out of ethics.
They talk a good deal no doubt of revolutionary ethics, but ihm is nothing more than the crassest
application of the theory that the end justifies the means Once an individual persuades himself,
sincerely or otherwise, that he is on the side of the revolution (or the Party of the People), he is
free to commit any infamy whatsoever.
MOTEHR TERESSA
About 20 years before India gained its freedom, Christian missionaries from Yugoslavia came to
India to render humanitarian services. They were extremely affected by the conditions of poverty
rampant in India and so invited people from their country to serve here. Amongst these was a
special girl called Agnes Goxa Bojaxiu, who is today known as Mother Teresa.
ARRIVAL IN INDIA
Agnes was born on August 27, 1910 and was just 19 years when she came to Calcutta on January
6, 1929. And she never left this country. Her aim in life was to serve the sick and the poor and
she dedicated her full life towards this purpose. She would roam the dangerous dark and dirty
streets of Calcutta at night, covering the cold and offering food and shelter to the poor. When she
first arrived in Calcutta, she had just Rs. 5.00, and was helped by a priest. She lived in a small
room for 9 years, where she nursed the ill back to health. Compassion, dignity and sympathy
marked her every action.
MISSION OF CHARITY
Through her efforts she managed to open several institutions to help the downtrodden e.g.
Missionaries of Charity, Nirmal Hriday, and Shishu Bhavan which houses the mentally and
physically challenged children. Mother Teresa was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979 and
the Bharat Ratna in 1980. Besides these she also received the Jawaharlal Nehru Award for
International Peace (1972), Ramon Magsaysay Award (1962) and the Templeton Foundation
Award (1973). As the Mother- General of the Missionaries of Charity, Mother Teresa has a
thousand Missionary institutions working under her.
Despite all the public acclaim, national and international honours, mother Teresa remained
humble, kind and generous till the end. The Florence Nightingale of India passed away in
September 1997.
Indian history has been witness to only one female Prime Minister - Indira Gandhi. She was the
third Prime Minister of India and the daughter of the first - Pandit Jawarharlal Nehru. Her charm,
intelligence and charisma made her a powerful statesperson. much loved and admired by her
people.
ARISTOTLE
Aristotle was born in either 385 or 384 B.C. at Stagira, a Mecedonian city some 350 kilometres
to the north of Athens. Aristotles father, Nicomachus, was a doctor of considerable ability, who
finally rose to be the chief physician at the court of Amyntas II. King of Macedonia. While in the
hitters service, he wrote a number of books on medicine and natural science. Aristotles mother,
Phoestis, was a native of Chalcis. By reason of his fathers profession, the young boy became a
member of the guild of Asclepaidae (named after Asclepius or Aesculapius, the Greek God of
Medicine), since the medical profession was hereditary in mat confraternity. He had every
opportunity and encouragement to develop a scientific bent of mind; he was prepared from the
beginning to become the founder of science.
His early acquaintance with natural science had a profound effect upon his way of thinking. Not
merely did it turn his interests in a particular direction the direction of analysis, experiment, and
classification-but it caused him finally to strike out on an original line of his own. This new
departure in thought has affected all subsequent enquiry whether scientific, philosophical,
political or ethical. For the ideas and conclusions of Aristotle have entered into our common
traditions of thought, so that we speak with his idiom even though we may protest ignorance of
his writings.
EDMUND BURKE
BURKE: A MAN OF POLITICAL ACTION
Edmund Burke was not of the type of an armchair thinker but like Machiavelli, he was primarily
a man of political action. He did not set forth explicitly the principles on winch his conception of
state rests; he did no give, for instance, an elaborate analysis of human nature that Hobbes
thought necessary to base his political theory, or propounded a moral and social principle which
Bentham made use of to establish his idea of greatest good of the greatest number.
Nevertheless, he developed certain principles during the course of his dealing with some
concrete contemporary political issues.
Burke had an opportunity to apply his notions and principles to many political problems of first
importance. He defended forcefully the party or cabinet system of government against the system
of administration by the monarch and the kings friends, which George III modeling himself on
Queen Elizabeth-was trying to reintroduce. The king was determined not merely to reign hut to
rule. This meant completely reorienting the direction of Government. Since the settlement of
1688 the king had chosen for his ministers men acceptable to Parliament. Now an effort was
made to choose only kings men as ministers and to bend Parliament to the kings will as
transmitted through his ministers. This was to be done by persuasion, bribery, or any other means
available. Unfortunately, it appeared that Parliament was only too willing to be won over to the
kings cause and, what was perhaps worse, was prepared to use the same high-handed methods in
its dealings wiih the people that the king used towards it.
KARL MARX
HIS LIFE AND CAREER
Karl Marx was born on May 5, 1818 in the city of Treves (Rhenish Prussia). His father was a
lawyer, a Jew, who in 1824 adopted Protestantism. The fanuly was well-to-do, cultured hut not
revolutionary. He studied jurisprudence, history and philosophy at Bonn and Berlin Universities.
He concluded his course in 1841, submitting his doctoral dissertation on the philosophy of
Epicurus. In his views Marx at that time was still a Hegelian idealist. In Berlin he belonged to the
circle of Left Hegelians (Bruno Bauer and others), who sought to draw authentic and
revolutionary conclusions from Hegels philosophy.
In September 1844, Friederich Engels came to Paris for a few days, and from that time forth
became Marxs closest friend. They both took a most active part in the then seething life of the
revolutionary groups in Paris (of particular importance was Proudhons doctrine, which Marx
thoroughly demolished in his Poverty of Philosophy, 1847), and, vigorously combating the
various doctrines of petty bourgeois Socialism, worked out the theory and tactics of
revolutionary Proletarian Socialism, or Communism (Marxism). In the Spring of 1847 Marx and
Engels joined a secret propaganda society called the Communist League, took a prominent part
in the Second Congress of the League (London, November 1847), and, at its request, drew up the
famous Communist Manifesto, which appeared in February 1848. With the clarity and brilliance
of genius, this work outlines the new world-conception, consistent materialism which also
embraces the realm of social life, dialectics, the most comprehensive and profound doctrine of
development, the theory of the class struggle and of the historic revolutionary role of the
proletariat-the creator of the new Communist society.