Leadership, Ethics and Krishna

I happened to see the last few minutes of the Hindi movie Khosla ka Ghosla on TV again yesterday. The movie brought to my mind a question one of my students had asked me last week in the course in Leadership Excellence that I teach at XLRI School of Business and Human Resources, Jamshedpur. She had asked if it was all right to take recourse to devious means for achieving dharmic – righteous – goals. Can we use adharma for achieving dharma? Shouldn’t the means used be as right as the end itself? Or does the end justify the means?

These questions are very significant. They are of extreme relevance to us both in our personal and our professional lives. Choice is part of every decision making act and these are questions that influence most of our choices.

The questions were raised in the course of our discussion of Krishna’s leadership in the Mahabharata, more specifically in the Mahabharata war. What the student who asked the questions had in mind was Krishna’s role in incidents like Drona’s and Karna’s death in the war, his role in getting Duryodhana and Jarasandha killed, and so on. The Pandavas obviously use on many occasions during the war what could only be called adharma and adharma is evil. In the battle against adharma, can we use evil?

I had answered the question in the class, but watching the movie brought the question back to my mind.

There are a lot of similarities between the Mahabharata and the story of Khosla ka Ghosla. The Mahabharata war at one level is about ownership of land – that of a kingdom, or at least half a kingdom, and in Khosla ka Ghosla, the central issue is ownership of a plot of land. If the man in the Mahabharata to whom the kingdom belongs is an adharmabhiru – committed to dharma and afraid of committing adharma – so is the man who is the real owner of the piece of land in the movie. If Yudhishthira has lived by dharma all his life, so has Khosla. If it was through adharma that the kingdom was snatched away from Yudhishthira, that’s exactly how it was grabbed from Khosla. If the man who snatched it away from Yudhishthira and now owns it believes in adharmic ways and has believed in them all his life, so is the case with Khurana in Khosla ka Ghosla. The Mahabharata shows Duryodhana as unscrupulous when it comes to keeping the kingdom, that is how the movie shows Khurana too. Duryodhana is powerful, through wealth and power attained through adharma; Khurana is powerful exactly through the same means.

Khosla’s battle is with a far more powerful enemy than himself, just as Yudhishthira’s was. Yudhishthira agrees to the battle only when all other means fail. He goes to the extent of agreeing to be contented with five villages, though he knows the whole kingdom is his. He sends Krishna as an emissary of peace to Hastinapura. Khosla too tries several means of claiming his plot of land back, including politicians, the police, and even a bunch of pahalvans.

When everything else fails, the battle becomes a necessity.

Confronted with an enemy far more powerful than himself, Khosla has no chance of winning back what belongs to him in a fair battle. But then his son and his friends come up with a way out: Give Khurana a taste of his own medicine. The son and his friends have to go about it initially without Khosla’s approval of their plan. He may lose the plot of land purchased at his retirement through his entire life’s savings, but he will not commit a single act of adharma – that’s Khosla’s stand.

The plan is to sell to Khurana a large plot of land that does not belong to them, but to the Fisheries Department of the Government. Khosla’s son’s friends belong to a theatre group, and one of them acts as a rich man from the Gulf to whom the land belongs. They fake ownership papers of the land in his name, papers which appear to be perfect, just as Khurana had got fake ownership papers made for Khosla’s plot of land. When the wily Khurana insists that he wants to see the plot before buying it, that he is not happy with just seeing the papers though everything is perfect on paper, the drama company takes over the vacant piece of land – someone becomes the old caretaker, another his wife, others workers on the plot and so on. Khurana is duped and hands over a huge sum of money as advance against the purchase – far more than the price of the land he had taken from Khosla by cheating.

Now the questions my student had asked in the class: Is it all right to take recourse to devious means for achieving righteous goals? Can we use adharma for achieving dharma? Shouldn’t the means used be as right as the end itself? Or does the end justify the means?

Khosla ka Ghosla, in which our sympathies are entirely with Khosla and his people, tells us that sometimes there are no ways other than adharmic to achieve dharmic ends. Does the end then justify the means? It does not, but there are rare occasions when you have no other choice.

And that is exactly what happens in the Mahabharata too.

Krishna has the highest ethical principles in the Mahabharata, but he is not an idealist, but very practical. Nor is the Mahabharata a work of idealism – it is a book as realistic as can be. What it deals with is not an imaginary situation, but a real life situation, with all the complexities of real life situations. And the truth of the matter is that to beat adharma you sometimes have to use adharma. As they say, to remove a thorn, you have to use another thorn.

What the Mahabharata teaches us is life based on dharma, leadership based on dharma. At the end of the book, Vyasa, the sage author, declares: “I lift up my arms and cry out: from dharma come prosperity and happiness.” And yet the epic also teaches us practical wisdom and says: śaThe śāThyam samācharet – Practice treachery with the treacherous. What it means is that sometimes only treachery works with the wicked. And in such cases, that treachery, if your heart is pure and if your goals are dharmic, is acceptable. Not as the first course, but as the last course. And even then, with great reluctance.

[Incidentally, the word śaTha has many other meanings, like obstinacy, for instance. The instruction śaThe śāThyam samācharet would then mean “Be obstinate with the obstinate.”]

The Mahabharata does not give a clean chit to treachery. It does not say it becomes dharma when practiced on the wicked. It still is adharma. But it admits that sometimes there is no other way.

And that exactly is the stand Krishna takes in the Mahabharata war.

Each time he uses devious means in the Mahabharata war, it is either with someone who practices adharma or with someone who stands with adharma. And even then he uses them only when all other means are closed. As the very last alternative.

This is true about the way he persuades Yudhishthira to tell Drona that Ashwatthama has been killed so that when Drona lays down his weapons Shikhandi can kill him. This is true about his role in the slaying of Karna and Duryodhana. And it is true about all other incidents in the war, too.

Contrary to popular perception, Krishna plays no devious role in the killing of Bhishma. [I have analysed this elsewhere.]

O0O

Here is a beautiful story from the Panchatantra.

Two crows, a husband and wife, live on a tree. A too cobra live in a hollow on the trunk of the tree. Every time the female crow lays eggs, the cobra comes and gobble them up. If somehow she manages to guard an egg until it hatches, the snake comes and feast on the chick. Many seasons pass, many years pass, and yet the crow couple have no children. They become desperate and do not know what to do. Such is the despair of the mother crow that she often thinks of ending her life – she is without children and every one of her eggs and children is being eaten up by the cobra before her eyes.

Finally she tells their friend the jackal of their misery. As advised by the jackal, the mother crow flies to the nearby tank where the queens of the local king were taking bath. Before entering the water, the women had removed their ornaments and kept them on the bank. The mother crow succeeds in snatching away the costliest of the ornaments – the priceless necklace of the chief queen – and flies back with it. She makes sure her snatching the ornament is seen by the women. The women make a big hue and cry and guards come running. They begin chasing the crow and the crow flies just out of their reach, making sure the chase continues.

When she reaches the tree on which she lives, she drops the necklace into the hollow in the tree in which the cobra lives.

The king’s guards find the snake in the hollow and kills it.

Is the mother crow’s action dharma or adharma? You be the judge.

O0O

A powerful industrial corporation plays hell with the lives of thousands of people and becomes a health hazard for the entire environment. They knowingly dump huge amounts of a deadly form of chromium into the town’s water which causes horrific diseases and affect large sections of the population. They care nothing for the suffering of the people; their only concern is their profit. They have bought the local government, they have bought the local police, the media dances to their tunes. There is no way they will allow any outsider to find out the truth of what exactly is happening. And a woman risks her life to find out the truth because she is deeply concerned for the innocent people. In her search for the dark truth if she breaks a few minor rules, is her act then dharma or adharma? Is she ethical or unethical? Does what she does say that the end justifies the means?

How do you define Erin Brockovich’s ethical standards?

O0O

If you trick the jinn back into the bottle because he is about to swallow you up for your crime of saving him, are you being unethical?

If you are a young woman and you cheat on the monster who abducts you on your wedding night and holds you prisoner for satisfying his lust, are you being unethical?

Jake was dying. His wife, Becky, was maintaining a candlelight vigil by his side.
She held his fragile hand, tears running down her face. Her praying roused him from his slumber. He looked up and his pale lips began to move slightly, "My darling Becky," he whispered.

"Hush, my love," she said. "Rest. Shhh, don't talk."

He was insistent. "Becky," he said in his tired voice, "I have something to tell you. I must confess to you."

"There's nothing to confess," replied the weeping Becky."Everything's all right. Go to sleep."

"No, no, I must die in peace, Becky. I slept with your sister. I slept with her best friend. I slept with your best friend, your best friend’s best friend and your…"

"I know," Becky interrupted and whispered softly, "That's why I poisoned you."

How do we judge Becky? Ethical? Unethical?

O0O

Leadership and Resourcefulness

A woman and a man are involved in a car accident on a snowy, cold Monday morning. It is a bad one. Both their cars are totally demolished, but amazingly neither of them hurt. After they crawl out of their cars, the man starts yelling at the woman driver. Women are stupid, he says, and they should never be allowed to drive. The woman keeps her cool. She says, “All right, all right. You’re a man and I’m a woman, that’s the fact and neither of us can help it. But look at it this way. Our cars are finished, there is nothing left, but we’re unhurt. This
be a sign from God that we should be friends and live in peace for the rest of our days.”

The man takes a good look at the woman again. She is beautiful. He is flattered, but he still cannot forgive the woman. He says, “Oh yes. I agree completely. This must be a sign from God! But you’re still at fault…. Women should not be allowed to drive.”

The woman continues, “And look at this, here’s another miracle. My car is completely demolished, but this bottle of wine didn’t break. Surely God wants us to drink this wine and celebrate our good fortune.” She hands the bottle to the man. The man nods his head in agreement, opens it and drinks half the bottle and then hands it back to the woman.

The woman takes the bottle, puts the cap back on and hands it back to the man. The man asks, “Aren’t you having any?”

The woman replies, “No, I think I’ll just wait for the police.”

That’s resourcefulness! A bit wicked, yes, but resourcefulness at its best!

I love the story!

O0O

A good leader needs to be resourceful.

Folklore from across the world is full of stories of resourcefulness. The Arabian Nights has numerous stories of resourcefulness, as do Hitopadesha and Kathasarit Sagara. The whole of Shuka Saptati, that ancient collection of seventy mildly erotic tales, consists of tales of resourcefulness. A tale of resourcefulness that l like very much is from the Panchatantra: the story of the blue jackal, which I am sure most of us have heard as children.

His name was Chandarava [Fierce Voice] and one day when he couldn’t find anything to eat in the jungle, he wandered into the town. The moment he reached the town, a pack of dogs began chasing him around, barking furiously. The jackal felt any moment they would tear him to pieces. He ran blindly, fearing his life. The first door he found open was that of dyer. He fled into the dyer’s. The dyer had a large vat filled with blue dye, ready for use. In his confusion, Chandarava fell into the vat. The dogs stood around him furiously barking, while he pressed himself into the vat as low as possible to escape their rage.

A moment later the jackal surfaced from the vat, unable to hold his breath any more. He shook his head to clear his eyes and hair of water.

Suddenly there was total silence all around. The dogs had stopped barking. The next moment they turned around and fled. For, what came out of the vat was not what went into it. The dogs had seen the jackal fall into the vat. What emerged was a creature none of them had ever seen. All blue, from the tip of his nose to his tail. They had never seen an animal like that.

Still hungry, the terrified jackal walked back into the forest. He had no idea what had made the dogs suddenly leave him and flee. Something had apparently scared him.

And then all on a sudden he realized the truth. It was he who had scared the dogs. For, in the jungle too, every animal that saw him turned around and fled. Foxes, hyenas, monkeys, deer. leopards, even tigers and lions. He approached a pack of his own people – jackals. And they bolted as one at his sight.

He stood still and took a good look at himself.

He was not the same jackal any more. He was all blue. A blue jackal! He had never seen a blue jackal. No one had ever seen a blue jackal. But he was one now.

The animals that had turned around and fled were now standing around and watching him from a safe distance. He looked into their eyes. What he saw there was mortal fear. And that gave him the idea.

He lifted his head majestically and addressed the animals. “Kukudruma – that’s my name, “he said. “And I am your king. Appointed by Brahma himself. He realized you needed a new king. And he has ordered that you shall all obey me. And the lion and the tiger shall work as my chief ministers. And those among you who are capable, as my other ministers. Like the panther and the wolf and so on.”

In great relief, the jungle accepted him as their new king. He made all the ferocious animals of the jungle his ministers and with their help, drove all the jackals away from the jungle. He said this was the order of Brahma – Brahma hated jackals. They were evil creatures. He would even have wiped out the memory of jackals from the minds of the animals, if that was possible.

Thus with quick thinking and resourcefulness the jackal became the unquestioned king of the jungle. The other animals hunted for him and he lived exactly as a mighty lord of the jungle should live. Served by lions, tigers, panthers, leopards and wolves and other animals.

The story does not end happily, as all of us who know the ancient fable know. But that does not matter to us. What matters is that with his resourcefulness, he was able to completely turn a bad situation around in his favour. What could have been a great tragedy and a reason from isolation and perhaps a lonely death, became a source of power for him.

That’s what resourcefulness can do for you.

O0O

Krishna, the greatest leader in the long history of India, displays brilliant resourcefulness throughout his life. I shall narrate here just one story in which he gives us a superb demonstration of his resourcefulness. The story is part of the Krishna legend and is well known.

The fierce Kalayavana lays siege to Mathura with a huge army. Krishna knows he cannot afford to lose his army fighting him. The Yadavas are expecting any time Jarasandha, their mortal enemy and the slain Kamsa’s father-in-law, at the borders of Mathura and they need all their resources to battle him.

After making arrangements for the safety of the fort and the people of Mathura, one day Krishna comes out alone to answer the challenge of the Yavana. Seeing him coming unarmed, Kalayavana too gives up his weapons, deciding to fight Krishna on equal terms. Dropping his weapons, the Yavana runs towards Krishna with a fierce battle cry. Krishna waits until he comes near and then turns around and bolts, surprising the Yavana and all his army. Krishna is known as a fearless warrior and nobody expected him to turn around and flee from an attacking enemy.

Kalayavana follows him. It appears to the Yavana that Krishna is tired and could be caught any instant. But as the warrior comes near, Krishna suddenly picks up speed and runs. Again and again the same thing happens. All along Kalayavana showers insults at the fleeing Krishna. Eventually both Krishna and the Yavana are from Mathura and the army.

Krishna has a definite plan. He is taking Kalayavana to a mountain cave where the ancient royal sage Muchukunda who once fought for the gods is now sleeping. Eventually they reach the mountain. Krishna enters the dark cave and the Yavana follows. As his eyes get used to the darkness of the cave, the Yavana sees a sleeping human form some distance from him. Taking it for Krishna collapsed on the floor from exhaustion, Kala goes to him and gives him a mighty kick. Muchukunda wakes up and opens his eyes that had been shut for ages. As his enraged eyes fall on him, the Yavana’s body bursts into flames and Kalayavana is turned into ashes, exactly as Krishna had known would happen, as per a boon the royal sage had received from Indra.

According to the Bhagavata, Krishna had to get Kalayavana killed by someone else since he could not have been killed by any Yadava because of a boon he had received from Shiva.

O0O

Resourcefulness is not to be confused with cunning. Resourcefulness is planning. It is foresight. It is thinking creatively. It is thinking on the spur of the moment. Thinking on your toes.

It is refusing to allow your limitations to overpower you.

My daughter recently brought a VCD when she came home for vacation and insisted that I must see it with her. She had seen it and now wanted to watch it again with me. The movie was 300, a movie about human excellence, courage, nobility and a lot of other things that make life the wonderful thing it is. For those who are not familiar with the movie, it is a recent retelling of the ancient Battle of Thermopylae which depicts King Leonidas and his army of three hundred Spartans fighting to death against Xerxes and his massive Persian army. Described as movie making at a cutting edge, it is an absolutely brilliant movie if you are willing to overlook the blatantly dark biases in the portrayal of Xerxes and his army and Asians in general.

We see Leonidas’ brilliant resourcefulness throughout the movie, including in bringing the seemingly endless Persian army [supposed to be of one million soldiers] to the narrow pass between the rocks and the sea at Hot Gates where the advantages are all with the Spartans and the disadvantages all with the Persians.

In an early scene in the movie we see how Leonidas goes to war against the law that said he shouldn’t because the oracles have spoken against it. When people object to the Spartan army going, quoting the law, this is what he says: “Nor shall it… these are three hundred men of my personal bodyguard. Our army will stay in Sparta.” He does not break the Spartan law that is sacred to his people, and yet he goes to war, taking the best of Spartan army with him – three hundred selected warriors who have chosen death over life as Persian slaves. Another example for a leader’s resourcefulness.

O0O

There was a 10-year-old boy who decided to study judo despite the fact that he had lost his left arm in a devastating car accident.

The boy began lessons with an old Japanese judo master. The boy was doing well, so he couldn't understand why, after three months of training the master had taught him only one move.

"Sensei," the boy finally said, "Shouldn't I be learning more moves?"

"This is the only move you know, but this is the only move you'll ever need to know," the sensei replied.

Not quite understanding, but believing in his teacher, the boy kept training.

Several months later, the sensei took the boy to his first tournament. Surprising himself, the boy easily won his first two matches. The third match proved to be more difficult, but after some time, his opponent became impatient and charged; the boy deftly used his one move to win the match. Still amazed by his success, the boy was now in the finals.

This time, his opponent was bigger, stronger, and more experienced. For a while, the boy appeared to be overmatched. Concerned that the boy might get hurt, the referee called a time-out. He was about to stop the match when the sensei intervened.

"No," the sensei insisted, "Let him continue."

Soon after the match resumed, his opponent made a critical mistake: he dropped his guard. Instantly, the boy used his move to pin him. The boy had won the match and the tournament. He was the champion.

On the way home, the boy summoned the courage to ask what was on his mind.

"Sensei, how did I win the tournament with only one move?"

"You won for two reasons," the sensei answered. "First, you've almost mastered one of the most difficult throws in all of judo. And second, the only known defense for that move is for your opponent to grasp your left arm."

The boy's biggest weakness had become his biggest strength through his master’s resourcefulness.

O0O

Resourcefulness has been defined as “the ability to cope with new challenges and situations promptly and skilfully as they arise. It is the ability to use problem solving methods to creatively channel available resources to meet situations effectively.”

Going by that definition, in a lighter vein, here is one more story of resourcefulness – this one from the Shuka Saptati, the ancient erotic classic from Sanskrit literature we mentioned earlier.

The man had long been suspecting that his wife was having an affair with another man in his own house. One night he lay awake pretending to be sleeping, hoping the catch her paramour. As he had hoped, sometime after he began breathing evenly as in sleep, he heard a sound in the room – someone was approaching quietly through the darkness. The paramour! The next instant the man caught his wife’s secret lover by his hair. Now he wanted to see his face.

By then his wife too was awake – of course, she hadn’t been sleeping, but had only been pretending like him, waiting for her lover. “What’s it?” she asked, alarm in her voice.

“Someone’s here,” he said. “I am holding him by his hair. Go get me some light.”

His wife was quick. “I am afraid to move in the dark. Let me hold him and you go and get the light.” The man agreed and got up, to go to the kitchen to get some light. The moment he left, she released her lover and sent him away, and instead brought their woolly dog in. When the man came back with light, what he saw was his wife holding their dog by its woolly hair.

“Don’t worry,” the woman consoled her husband as she released the dog. “He must have been hungry and come hoping for something to eat. Come darling, get back into bed while I give him something.”

This too is resourcefulness!

O0O