Business Sutra: A Very Indian Approach to Management (22 page)

Thus, the secret was transmitted. But a price had to be paid. The horse had to die. This could have been avoided, had Indra allowed the free sharing of knowledge. But if knowledge was freely shared, would Indra be Indra, the king of devas and ruler of Amravati?

The devas believe that they have a right to what they have, that they are not obliged to give, like the inventor of an intellectual patent or the inheritor of a large conglomerate. This is disputed by those who believe wealth and knowledge need to be shared freely, that locking in wealth and building walls is the root of wars, deprivation and suffering.

For the devas, the asuras are barbarians, who have to be killed for trying to steal the wealth that they have created. For the asuras, the devas are thieves who exploited resources that they never knew they had. Therefore, the battle between them is never-ending; both are convinced the other is unworthy and wrong.

Violence often happens when we take what others will not give. In Hindu mythology, the devas are often shown withholding treasures that other creatures want. This results in violence. The devas never lead a peaceful existence. Amravati is always besieged.

Kulapathi is an adviser to the government. He has advised the government against signing international patent laws. He believes that the creator does have the moral right to benefit from his creation. However, if he respects the creator's right, millions in his country will not get life-saving medicines. These will have to be imported at high cost and the government will be forced to provide subsidies and grants to make them available, which will ruin an already weak economy. Against immense international pressure, Kulapathi argues passionately about ignoring the rights of the creator. He feels he may be ethically wrong, but he is morally right. The rest of the world disagrees. Kulapathi is Dadichi who will ensure knowledge passes to the Ashwini, whether Indra allows it or not.

Exploitation is violence

Once, Lakshmi disappears from Swarga as the excesses of Indra disgust her. She dissolves herself in an ocean of milk. The devas decide to churn the ocean of milk to get Lakshmi back. They use Mount Mandara as the churning spindle and the serpent-king, Vasuki, as the churning rope. But they realize they alone cannot churn the ocean; they need a counterforce. So they call upon their half-brothers, the asuras. The asuras agree as they are assured a share of the treasures that will emerge: the share is not clarified; no one knows what they will receive.

Many treasures emerge from the ocean: symbols of prosperity such as the wish-fulfilling tree, the wish-fulfilling cow, the wish-fulfilling gem; symbols of kingship such as the horse and the elephant; and symbols of pleasure such as wine, musicians and nymphs. The greatest treasure to emerge is amrit, the nectar of immortality.

The devas consume the amrit, and do not share it with the asuras, arguing that there was no agreement on what share would go to the asuras.

Rendered immortal, the devas now have an unfair advantage. They claim all the treasures of the sea and rise to the sky. The asuras are angry and they return to their realm under the earth. Never will they forgive the devas for their trickery. They will fight to repossess what was originally theirs, again and again for time immortal.

This story has confounded many Hindus, as conventionally, the devas are seen as gods, and are hence morally upright, while the asuras are demons, hence morally fallen. How can the gods trick and cheat?

The root of this confusion lies with the English words 'gods' and 'demons', used first by European orientalists, and the attribution of morality to devas. This distinction does not exist in the ancient Sanskrit texts, the Purans. In the Purans, both the devas and asuras are sons of Brahma, and represent different aspects of human personality.

The asuras sit over raw material, which unless extracted has no value. The devas bring value. If the devas did not come along, Lakshmi would stay dissolved in the ocean of milk. Because of the devas, Lakshmi becomes Sachi. Once she becomes Sachi, the asuras seek her back.

Often in a yagna, the tathastu is far greater than the svaha. The yajaman claims it as his right, since the yagna was his idea. But that does not stop the asuras from feeling they have been tricked or cheated. This sparks resentment and changes the mood of the yagna.

The asuras can be seen as the workers who work in industries which have been built using the money and knowledge of the devas. Who should be the beneficiaries of the fruit of their labour? Those who invested in the machinery and raw material, or those who laboured over it? The shareholders or the employees? The line of sight of the investor is different from that of the entrepreneur. What would construe a fair share? One party feels exploited and the other party feels fettered. Even the prajapatis disagree: Brihaspati sides with the devas and Shukra with the asuras.

The rishi saw the event from both points of view and realized there was no objective answer to the conundrum. The narrative of the battle between devas and asuras draws our attention to the violence inherent in a culture where both the haves and have-nots co-exist. At the same time, if there are no have-nots, there can be no haves.

When Hemadri returned home after completing his education, he spent hours looking at the financial statements of the family business. He realized that the family could easily pay the workers more wages and provide them with better facilities. His father and grandfather had a very different view altogether. "Before we came here, this place was a jungle with no employment opportunities. Now many have a job. If we overpay them, they will use that money to drink and beat their wives, which they do anyway with the meagre salaries we pay them. It will get worse. They will not turn up for work. They will become arrogant and demanding. Immigrant labour is no solution, as the locals will beat outsiders and drive them away. We have to control them and the best way to control them is by keeping them on a tight leash financially." Hemadri disagrees but as long as he is not in charge he has to keep his views on social justice to himself.

Hoarding is violence

Like the never-ending conflict between devas and asuras, there is another conflict that is ceaseless: that between yakshas and rakshasas; also sons of Brahma who represent different aspects of human personality.

While devas do not share, the yakshas simply hoard. The latter are guardians of earth's treasures. They built the golden city of Lanka. The rakshasas led by their king, Ravan, drive the yakshas out of Lanka and lay claim to the city. The yakshas then seek refuge on the slopes of Kailas and build another city, called Alanka, more popularly known as Alaka. In Shiva's shadow, they feel safe.

The rakshasas are often mistaken for the asuras. They are two very different sons of Brahma. Asuras fight the devas to reclaim what they believe has been stolen from them. Rakshasas, on the other hand, do not believe in exchange; they simply take what they want.

The yakshas do not see hoarding as excess consumption even though by hoarding, they deprive someone of wealth. The deprivation of wealth leads to starvation which, in turn, fuels violence.

It is ironical that both the yakshas and rakshasas worship Shiva who yearns for nothing. Yakshas keep hoarding because they are anxious to create enough wealth to satisfy future starvation. The rakshasas keep stealing because that is the only way they know to gather food. The yakshas accuse rakshasas of laziness; the rakshasas accuse yakshas of greed. Each see the other as villains and themselves as victims. Neither sees the fear, fuelled by imagination that makes them, and the other, behave the way they do.

The number of robberies in the neighbourhood have risen especially affecting senior citizens. Naturally, Mrs. Nagarkatti is scared. Her two sons are in America and her daughter is in Singapore. They call her every day and send her money by wire transfer. But in the house she is alone with one servant during the day and one at night. In the city there are many unemployed and underemployed young men and women who envy those who drive around in fancy cars, eat in fancy restaurants, and live in fancy homes. Every time they switch on the television they are enticed by advertising and lifestyles they cannot afford. One of them is Girish who visited Mrs. Nagarkatti's house to solve a small electrical problem. He noticed the diamonds in her ears and the gold bangle she was wearing. He asked her for 500 rupees. She called him an overcharging cheat, paid him only 200 rupees and complained to his boss. He wants to teach her a lesson. Or is that simply an excuse to justify his desire for the earrings and bangle that will allow him to experience all those fancy things he only dreams about. A lonely Mrs. Nagarkatti wants to move to an Alaka of her own, where she will feel safe in Shiva's shadow. Girish is on the verge of breaking the law and getting the diamonds and gold by force to his Lanka.

Hunger is insatiable

Kubera, king of yakshas, once paid a visit to Kailas. There he saw Shiva's elephant-headed son, the corpulent Ganesha seated next to his father, and thought to himself, "Ganesha clearly loves food but Shiva cannot afford to feed him to his heart's content." So as a favour to Shiva, Kubera invited Ganesha to a meal. Ganesha accepted the invitation and entered Kubera's kitchen.

When the food was served, Kubera said, "Eat to your heart's content." Kubera regretted these words soon after, for Ganesha kept eating and eating. He ate everything that was in the kitchen and asked for more. Food had to be bought from the larder and then from the market. But Ganesha was still hungry. "More please," he said, raising his trunk. Kubera saw his treasures dwindling but there was no sign of Ganesha stopping. Finally, Kubera fell at Ganesha's feet realizing he was being taught a lesson.

Ganesha raised his trunk and said, "You really think food will satisfy hunger! Food fires the imagination, imagination enhances hunger. You seek to create more food, but food is finite and hunger infinite. My father seeks to destroy hunger. That is why I sit in his house, and not in your kitchen."

Sharda is thrilled when she learns that her contractor has to pay her more. She has a right to minimum wages. But now it has been two years, and the minimum wages she has been regularly paid is just not enough. With a regular income, she has been able to create a simple and secure lifestyle for her children. Unlike her, they have not spent a childhood going to bed hungry. Now they have dreams. They want things that she cannot afford to buy. Suddenly, what seemed like a lot of money two years ago seems paltry now. Unknown to Sharda, her contractor's son, Digvijay, was most happy when he got a salary that allowed him to buy a car; no more bus, train, or rickshaw rides to get to work. But now, two years later, he too is unhappy. He wishes he had a better salary so he could afford to hire a driver. Both Sharda and Digvijay are experiencing their hunger expanding because of imagination. Only introspection or tapasya will curtail it.

Indra's Amravati satisfies hunger. But Indra's name suggests that hunger is not physical—indriya, the term which gives rise to the name Indra, means the senses. Human hunger is not just the physical hunger of the stomach, but also the hunger of the senses. We yearn to pleasure the mind. We want entertainment otherwise we are plagued by boredom, loneliness and angst. The hunger of the mind is far greater than the hunger of the body. That is why Indra needs not just the wish-fulfilling triad of Kalpataru, Kamadhenu and Chintamani but also needs the dance of the apsaras and the song of the gandharvas. So, no amount of wealth can satisfy him. That is why the rich aspire to be richer.

Civilized society speaks of generating and distributing enough wealth to satisfy the basic needs of people. We imagine that when these needs are met, there will be peace. But when basic needs are met, the mind craves the next level of needs. When that craving is not satisfied, there is conflict. Conflict will therefore never end, unless we address the root issue: craving itself. We can fill the stomach, but we can never satisfy the mind.