Middle East: Wolves will Hunt, and Pythons will Swallow
Questioner: Namastey Acharya Ji, this is regarding the recent war which is happening. So, we see that one country seems to have the entitlement to take preemptive actions to make sure that they do exist in the future also, because they have existential threats — or that's how they perceive it. If you look at the individual level or at the country level, if we face a situation like this, then to what extent do we have the right?
Acharya Prashant: Yes, yes.
Questioner: They have that. Now they have taken a preemptive action. Is it valid to take an action which can completely destroy the other country?
Acharya Prashant: You are trying to analyze the whole thing in a moral framework — whether it is right, what can be the outcome, to what extent can one go, those are the questions you are posing.
See, in Pṛakṛti, morality does not exist, right? In Pṛakṛti, In the animal world, morality doesn't exist. The animal world just strives for survival, and anything that threatens my survival has to be obliterated. That's it. That's Pṛakṛti for you. That's the plants, that's the microbes, that's the animals, the birds, that's the entire game of evolution. I have to survive, and for my survival, if somebody has to be wiped out, I'll wipe him out. That's it. Simple.
There is no morality really there. Though, being human beings, you want to frame it in moralistic terms. We want to kind of pretend that the action has some kind of moral basis to it. But there is no moral basis. Really, there is no moral basis.
Questioner: So they can do whatever they want.
Acharya Prashant: Obviously, though whatever is done would always be framed in principled terms: "We are operating on this principle," "We are operating on that principle."
Iran, Israel, Hamas, Jordan, US, Pakistan — these are all going to be the parties there. They'll all have their set of noble and moral principles to quote. Israel will say, "You know, operating on this principle have we attacked." And Iran will say, "Oh, we are against Zionism." And the US will say, "It is for the sake of world peace that we are entering the war." So there is some principle, some principle, some principle.
In the jungle, there is no principle. Really, the only principle is: "I have to exist."
I was reading somewhere: do-gooders, in the name of climate crisis mitigation, tried planting trees close to a forested area. They think that if they plant trees, then they can arrest climate change, without even going into the facts and the numbers. I quoted the numbers because such greenwashing has been happening since long and has become even more pervasive today.
People think that by planting one tree or ten trees, they have done their bit — which is not even 1% of the total emissions that they are annually responsible for. The tree cannot absorb much.
So, somebody planted some trees on the borders of a forest. You know what the trees did? They ate up the forest. Because the forest was not used to that particular species. These are called invasive species. So all the native species of trees, they started disappearing. And when the native trees started disappearing, the birds that used to live on those trees, they also started disappearing. The entire ecosystem was on the brink of collapse.
It's not that just human beings want to have their own survival at the cost of other human beings, or nations want to survive at the cost of other nations. Even trees want to survive at the cost of other trees. There could be six trees of a particular species or mixed species. You bring in one invasive species and all those six would be gone. This one species would have proliferated itself. "I want space for myself." That's what every species wants.
What was the rationale for the entire World War II? Hitler said “The Germans are a superior lot, a higher race, and Germany does not have too much land, and the population is burgeoning — the most populated country in that region. So the Germans deserve more land, and that more land was to be had from Eastern Europe.” So, he attacked Poland. It's just that when he attacked Poland, Britain and France declared war on Germany. So Hitler had to fight on the western front also. Otherwise, what he wanted was land — land from Eastern Europe. Invasive species.
"I need to have stuff for myself, you see.” I don't care for others. That's the law of the jungle. And Pṛakṛti is very happy with that. Our problem is with that, we want to write the whole thing in the language of morality. And in that language, this story cannot be written.
What is happening is just a game of our very primitive instincts. I need more land. I need to secure my own physical survival. I need more land. So, you know, there is the West Bank, there is Gaza, there is the Jerusalem problem. I need to ensure my survival. So, before he strikes at me, I can strike preemptively. And in the language of survival, that does sound fine, does it not? Or do you wait for the enemy to amass nuclear capacity and bomb you out of existence?
Israel is a small country, half the size of Kerala. You take a few largest districts of India, and you find Israel is comparable in the same league. That's how big Israel is. You drop two nuclear weapons there and the entire place is gone. Not even 1 crore Jews — 70-75 lakh, that's all. Do you get this? So then what is the solution? The real solution is to not let these animals remain animals. That is the only real solution. As long as animals remain animals in human form, they'll fight for survival. Your entire body is a killing machine. What do the WBCs and the T cells exist in the body for?
We are killing all the time. In Pṛakṛti, killing is not violence. Killing is movement. Killing is action. Killing is the norm. Even as the two of us talk to each other, our bodies are busy killing. The entire air around us is full of microbes of all kinds, and they keep entering the body — water, air, food, skin, they're all the time penetrating your body. And your body is a killing machine. Any foreign thing that enters your body, your body fights it and kills it. That's Pṛakṛti. And you cannot say your body is immoral. Your body is Pṛakṛti.
The lion is hunting down the deer. The eagle is swooping down on the sparrow. That's Pṛakṛti, killing all the time. The cute little bird just ate up the little insect, and the bird is so cute but it's killing insects all the time. That's Pṛakṛti. To each his own. Everybody is concerned only about their own survival. That's Pṛakṛti.
Israel is saying, "My survival is threatened. I will attack.” As long as we remain things of the jungle, this will continue. Wisdom is the solution. You don't need to transcend to become enlightened. You need to transcend so that you become human beings.
We are beasts. We are beasts in human form. That's how we are born. And that's not being abusive or being offensive — that's being factual. We are beasts, that's it. We are beasts with intellect, with nuclear scientists, with high IQs. We are beasts. So we need transcendence so that we can become human beings. Enlightenment etc. is a far cry — fantastic.
Questioner: But I think by the time, if we even think that people will be not truly enlightened, but by the time they understand that, what will be the repercussions of it? It's going to be too late.
Acharya Prashant: And Pṛakṛti doesn't care. "Too late" is from your own center of reference. Pṛakṛti doesn't care. All of you are wiped out, doesn't care. There have been five mass extinctions till now. Almost everything was wiped out. Pṛakṛti doesn't care.
If you feel it'll be too late and everybody would be gone, then the responsibility is on you — to help elevate these beasts into human beings. Otherwise, this game will continue. There would be World War III and everything would be over. And that's all. And that can happen — like within this month, within this decade. I won’t say within this century because this century won’t wait for World War III. Climate change is enough. That would be worse than World War III.
This is seen in terms of the universe, this is a petty game going on, on one particular oblate spheroid. We are smaller than a speck of dust in the universe. Aren’t we? Living on a minuscule little ball. We are fighting our petty games — ball. And there is this little tiny ball, and we are all living on it and throwing nukes at each other. Who bothers? Existence doesn’t bother. Pṛakṛti, the universe doesn’t bother. You destroy each other, your biggest nuclear weapon is smaller than a Diwali cracker when it comes to the solar system.
Jupiter is more than a thousand times bigger than Earth. And Jupiter is such a small planet orbiting a medium-sized star — the Sun. And there are millions of such Suns in your galaxy, and there are billions of galaxies in the universe. Who cares if your species is obliterated? Prakriti says — go to hell, who cares?
But if you care, as a conscious being, then the responsibility is all upon you. And the only real method is, don’t let the beast remain the beast. The beast could be a three-piece suit wearing beast, a nuclear-degree holding beast, a popular-mandate holding beast. The beast is still a beast. Sitting in front of a supercomputer and wearing a tie, the beast does not become a human being.
Don’t make the mistake of looking at things from the wrong center. You are assuming these are conscious beings, and therefore, there is a moral angle to their actions. No sir. All morality is superficial. All morality is just for display. These are not conscious beings. Their actions do not come from consciousness. Their actions come from the primitive instinct for survival — survival at any cost, physical survival above everything else. That’s the instinct, and you cannot condemn that instinct.
We are not condemning it, we are acknowledging it. Yes, that's what is found in the jungle, that's found in all beasts, that's also what is found in human beings. Now, if that piques you, then enter the fray — let's fight it out.
Questioner: Yeah, it seems that spreading the Gita mission is the only solution.
Acharya Prashant: This is the only solution. And I'll die a fulfilled man. I'll know I tried the utmost. I did the maximum I could. I also know that in my lifetime I'm not going to see much success. I see the stupidity of those opposed to me, but I also see the absolute idiocy of those with me. That's fine. This is the only way to save anything possible. And yet we are so passive, so indifferent, so inactive, so guarded. We are still saving for another day. I might die fulfilled, but I'll still be sad — something was possible, it couldn't be done.
