Business to the Buddha

Tag: The Buddha

  • The world is imperfect!







    When I was in my teens, I wanted to change a lot of things. The political system, the education system and even the social system of India. This was furthered by the program – the Big Fight of Rajdeep Sirdesai. Once my father told me – “world will remain the same, it was same at the time of the Buddha (people pelted stones on him, conspired against him), it was same at the time of Kabir. Jesus was crucified, Mira poisoned and so was Osho. The world still, is the same and would remain the same. Why do you want to change the world? Look at yourself and why do not you think of changing yourself.”

    My father is right the world is the same and will remain the same. The need of the hour is to change oneself, because everything starts with ‘I’ and surprisingly everything ends with ‘I’ (earlier blog on Forbidden word). Is not it an irony? I did not understand the deeper level of my fathers message for a long long time. Many ‘I” create the world, and each single ‘I’, has its own definition of ‘perfect’. Interestingly, the definition of perfect keeps on changing and therefore, the single definition of a perfect does not remain intact within the mind of ‘I’. This starts one conflict then the other and so on. The conflicts are -at least – as many as the ‘I’ in the world.

    The world is imperfect, the world will remain imperfect or perhaps we – as individuals – are not attuned to accept it and live with it. Effectively, perhaps we – as individuals – are not perfect. I think this is why we suffer and perhaps this is where the Buddha started on the four noble truth – there is suffering, there is cause of suffering, there is a solution and lastly ‘the path’. I believe, the suffering is not because of the world, but because we see things as we want to see and when something does not work according to our logic we feel the world is imperfect.

    Related blog based on The book of Mirdad – Ego and Forbidden word

  • Money – what is it?







    This was a very candid question Prof Mankads asked once – ‘What is money?’ and he answered – ‘Money is what is accepted a money.’ True, money is what is accepted as money. Humanity needed some tangible measure so we deviced various forms of money at various time. For example at the time of barter system ‘everything’ was weighted against the other. So everything was acceptable in trade as money. Then came matels and now paper and plastic money (credit cards).

    I started thinking if we needed something tangible as money what if we made something like Camay (soap) a currency? If some other things be made money what would happen? Take an example of age – everyone would gradually get money. Fun or being funny – comadians would have maximum money in the world. Seriousness – patients in extremely intencive care units. Trust – Indian politicians or politicians in general would stand nowhere. Spirituality – the spiritual masters would be at the top, one I know is Sri Sri Ravi Shankar.

    Now if we ask ourselves – who is rich? The simple answer is one who has ‘more’ money. ‘More’ is contextual (adjective). Now, if we take money as fun, being happy or being funny. How many of us are rich today? Kids in school are competing, people are jealous or many of us have only instant gratification and long term sorrow. Not many of us are rich! Has money made anyone happier?

    Assume Trust be the currency. How many have earned it? Yes trust is hard earned currency, right? Bankers have lost their trust of 100+ years (see the occupy wall street movement), politicians have lost it. Citizen vote because they think someone will improve the systems. On the contrary we all still remember Jesus, the Buddha and other Masters. Plato, Aristotle and Chanakya. We named unit of force on the name of Newton we say Da Vinci was genius. Were they ‘RICH’ in terms of hoarded money? So, what if we measure richness on different factors now and in future. See this engineer mind thinks of formulae (which is not correct, yet I am writing it) –
    Richness = [{(money + Happiness)*Trust/greediness}^(1/greediness)]*(peace of mind)*spirituality
    and other important stuff
    Range of the variables
    0 > Money, Happiness and Trust > 1
    Greediness > 1 upto infinite
    peace of mind and spirituality> 1
    ^ stands for raise to the power

    I think everyone of us has to identify what we want from our life and that one or few things would be The thing(s) which would make each one of us Rich (not necessarily Money). Of course, this richness should not come at the expense of others or harming others.

  • We – “the Societies…”







    I read a book on the Buddha – Old Path White Clouds. Really, the path is very old. We are still struggling after many centuries. The book starts with a young Bhikku – Svasti a buffalo tending boy. The Buddha had tried hard to bridge the gap pervading in society at that time. During the time of Mahabharat (even before the Buddha) Karna had to face it (as son of a charioteer, check Wiki). I am talking about the societies we have formed. We are divided by race, religion, nationality, region, caste and sub-castes. Therefore we are not a society we are ‘societies’.

    I read two news items and thought to write about them. Though personally I feel religious belief is a personal matter and therefore no ‘group’ should interfere with beliefs of individuals. However, we have made religious belief system an organization which now has become a business as well as tool to discriminate. Anyways, the first news item was – First whiff of justice for Gujarat riot victims and the second was – Dalits enter Madurai temple after two long decades. In northern part of India people feel that southern states are far less discriminating, is that true? This news item shows different picture.

    At the time of the Buddha there was only four divisions of Indian society (as only Hinduism existed). Now we have many religion, languages, states, castes and sub-castes. The task of bridging gaps has become difficult in our times. Take an example of one belief system of India. The concept of this system was ‘a casteless society’, within 1000 years of its existence there are about 16 different sub-caste in this single belief system! The number is alarming because old Hindu system has only 4 castes (of course 4 are then sub divided) and this example less than 1000 year old has 4 time more sub divisions. I have heard Islam has 70+ sects, Buddhism has at least 3, Christianity has a few. Phew! how long will we divide as well as fight the so called holy wars?

    If we see at a macro level – we are divided in nation we live in, language we speak, color of skin, economic status for that matter brand of car we use. I am sure no spiritual master had meant to use his/her teachings as a tool to discriminate. We are humans and is not that enough to thrive, survive and grow physically, mentally and spiritually? ‘The path’ is really very old, we are still not able to understand it. We are ‘societies’ and we do discriminate, why?

    Related blog – Business of religion!

  • Theory of constraints






    Prof Moradian taught us concept of the Theory of Constraint. He also suggested us to read a book by Eliyahu Goldratt – The Goal. In the novel, protagonist is struggling with the operational inefficiencies of his plant and therefore facing a constant fear of management decision to close the plant.

    Well, what is this theory of constraints (ToC)? In brief ToC states that “A chain is no stronger than its weakest link”. I was thinking that this concept is applicable to our society too. We are evolving, we are constantly developing some thing or the other, society is a sort of factory. And the concept of the ToC applies equally to our life. Look at it this way if rich becomes richer the poorer would become weaker link of the society. Have you heard that during recession crime rate increases? This is ToC for our society. Lately, lot of demonstrations are happening across world by the title Occupy Wall Street. This is where I think that ToC can be applied in the society.

    I thought about interdependent co-arising and the Theory of Constraints in conjunction. My understanding of interdependent co-arising is that – we are all dependent on each other and for growth of each individual other has to necessarily grows. In other words, if society wants to evolve, everyone in the society has to evolve. The weakest link of the society may hamper the growth of society in total. Here I see a solution to the constraint, perhaps a socialistic one. We as a society have to help each other to grow (strengthen the weakest link), otherwise we would see increasing “Occupy Wall Street” kind of movements or increasing crime rates in future.

    I shared these thoughts with Prof Moradian and he said the idea is good why don’t you think about throughput and operating expenses and develop this concept of ToC in society further? This made me dig deeper. It is said that ‘a stitch in time saves nine’. If we rewind to 2008, after months of searching for alternatives Mr Barnanke, Mr Paulson and others had to bail-out banks of USA. Why not we start doing something now and for future. I see the operating expenses of this approach as deferred expense of brand building (building society) exercise for future. The throughput of the exercise would be availability of competitive, capable and intelligent work force for companies. These capable people would be the spenders of tomorrow – moving the wheel of consumerism forward – effectively, the solution may not be as socialistic as I think.

    Related blog – Ideate – save the sinking ship

  • Syādvāda – The Doctrine of Postulation







    I had written about this earlier, however thought to revisit the same again. What is the meaning of system when it is not solving the required purpose? Let us take the same example again from my previous post Lost in translation. What is the meaning of grammar (System) if the language (Following the system) is not able to communicate the message using the grammer?

    To make my point further clear, let me take recent developments in India. In case of Anna Hazare, the Government was shouting about the SYSTEM in place, “THE SUPREME PARLIAMENTARY PROCESS” and therefore was not relenting to the rightful issue of sentiments of the common man of India. What is the use of such process which is not listening to the voices of people, and we call it DEMOCRACY! At the same time, Supreme court of India has kept death sentences (ruled in favor of High Court) for Killer of Mr Rajiv Gandhi and Afzal Guru (involved in parliament attack of 2003), let me repeat – Supreme Court of India. Yet for many years they are in jails of India. Now, the system of respecting the Supreme Court is not followed. What kind of SYSTEMS we are talking about?

    A man/woman – actually killer in some sense – is in jail not receiving the fruits of his/her crime, why because we can do away with some systems selectively to suit our benefits. At the same time a man (Anna) – who is fighting for a cause – is given rule-book and all sorts of stories of systems, stating what he is doing is not in favor of democracy. What nonsense! Are not these systems making us handicap rather than helping us? Is the system making us feel – in India, you can get away with murders too?

    Reiterating this from my earlier blog – …I am not arguing against systems. I am just trying to say that one has to answer the question – why at first place we designed systems?

    1. to facilitate operations of society (in case of religion, culture and laws)
    2. to facilitate operations of work (in case of businesses).

    Inputs from Prof Mankad on need of system –
    3. to facilitate understanding of the present and formulating vision for the future (in case of education)
    4. to facilitate orderly day to day living for people, ensure fairness in dealings, security and openness (in case of governance, transparency and judiciousness). At times, systems are inadequate too.

    And therefore my stand is no spiritual teacher advocated “create a religion in my name” …and do business on the same. They just showed the path, I recall Mahavir (one of the messengers of Jainism) used ‘Syādvāda’. What I understand about ‘Syādvāda’* is – this is true and that is also true. Everything is based on relativity. Systems are correct if they solve the basic purpose, if they do not – better to change them. Everything of 12th century (or Before Christ) may not be relevant today better abolish some of them, right? So, relevance is important and thus the doctrine of postulation… systems are correct but in context, be it democracy of India. Mahavir said that 500 years BC (Before Christ), we are still not listening/learning, are we?

    More on Syādvāda in future blogs.

    *Note – it is purely my understanding and please do your research for references

  • Dichotomy on happiness…







    “There are some things money cannot buy…” I am not talking about Master Card! Generally speaking, I was thinking that there are many things money cannot buy. In fact, the Buddha left his whole empire! He too knew there are “somethings money cannot buy”. This is where I had two minds, and thought to share these thoughts and request for feedbacks.

    The first and foremost thing money cannot buy is LOVE, you are a better judge for this. Other important thing is happiness, in a spiritual context ‘bliss’.

    Sometime back I decided to leave a very lucrative offer the reason was I knew at my heart of my heart, I would not want to do this work and would not enjoy the work. The other option was – nothing! So, it was a tough decision to leave something (something immensely rewarding) for nothing. Recently, I met one of my friends (he knew my previous decision) his first and repeated question to me was – ‘Are you happy?’ And all the time my answer was – ‘YES, are not you happy with what you are doing?’ His response was with many riders – “yes for ‘X’ I am happy, but because of ‘Y’ I have some issues, you know this and you know that and this is what and whatever whatever etc”.

    I thought we take so many decisions “for” or “because of” some or the other things e.g. money. We tend to give drivers seat to our ‘mind’ for making criteria and decision too, while a rear seat to our ‘heart’. Relationship, emotions, all these relate to heart and we largely overlook these while making decision. However, being human we are driven largely by emotions and therefore there has to be a balance between rationality and emotion in decision making too.

    Then came the second perspective – if one wants to be happy no one can stop him/her from being happy. Happiness is a very personal matter. Two persons in similar circumstances could have different feelings (one ecstatic and other wretched). Peace of mind cannot be bought in the market, it has to be felt. If it has to be felt, why cannot one be peaceful while doing whatever he/she is doing? … So the dichotomy is – do we make decision based on few factors and that is the reason for us to be happy or we are happy because we want to be happy and irrespective of the decision we make or irrespective of what happens in our life.

    The question to ask is – happiness requires fulfillment of the CONDITIONS we create for being happy or it is a feeling irrespective of what happens in our life/to us? These conditions, to me, are never ending… as it happens to the squirrel in Ice Age-Trilogy and to Chaipau in Salaam Bombay“. Dichotomy of happiness is you decide on what you enjoy doing or you remain happy irrespective of the situation you are in….

    Related blogs – Cause…, the Middle Path, No judgement its all about perception and Balancing Act, When will we stop?

  • When will we stop?







    I watched this movie – Salaam Bombay! directed by Meera Nayar (1988). This movie was nominated for Oscars as Indian entry. A sad movie with only one good thing – a character ‘Baba’ dies, receiving the fruits of his deeds.

    The end of the movie seemed very artistic, philosophical and thought provoking to me. The hero – Chaipau or Krishna – is back to square one. Khali haath aaya tha aur khali hath hi hai. (in Hindi) He comes to Mumbai (Bombay of that time) empty hands and is empty hands in the end too. He has a beyblade (or torque) in his hand. That toy to me was the vicious circle of life.

    The protagonist has to collect INR 500 for his elder brother for a damaged bike. Circumstances happen such that he could never save that much. It seemed similar to me as the Ice Age 1 2 3 squirrel on which I wrote earlier in the blog Cogito Ergo Sum meaning “I think, therefore, I Exist”. The squirrel is behind the corn and our protagonist is for collecting INR 500. A sad truth – we are always running behind something. When the Buddha told to Angulimala – “I stopped long back, when will you stop?” Angulimala – a hardened criminal – stopped.

    Our INR 500 will never be saved and the corn will always elude us… When will we stop?

  • The Machine that Changed the World







    I read this book recently “The Machine that Changed the World“. It is indeed a good book every businessman should read it. “The business is run on trust” or “the business will be run on trust”. When we hear this statement it seems odd, however it is true Trust is the factor. I wrote often about ‘interdependent co-arising‘ (Blog 1, Blog 2 and Blog 3). When I read this book I realized that it is practiced in Japan for many years. Toyota has substantial equity share in its suppliers and the suppliers of suppliers. This is a complete mesh of cross-locking equity structure. They trust each other decide a profit margins rather than hiding the cost structures. According to the book “…This system has replaced the vicious circle of MISTRUST into VIRTUOUS circle of COOPERATION…”.

    The cross linking equity structure goes to a deeper level and different competitors also own each others share. This shareholding pattern is to help each other raise funds. Reference to this is – “The Machine that Changed the World” page 194 perhaps it is edition 1.

    What I found interesting (page 151 of the book I think first edition) – when the volume of demand changes and assembler gives notice to the supplier and in case the volume (demand forecast) fluctuates “…The assembler will work with the supplier to look for other business…”. This is not only interesting but also a surprising and welcoming effort to build trust. One more thing I found very impressive and useful – “…we (suppliers) work without safety net, so we cannot afford to off the high wire…” and thus suppliers maintain the quality not only for their own sake but also for the assemblers.

    The other interesting fact is not just production but also product development is done in cooperation. We hear “crowd-sourcing” as a means for innovation however, a crude system has been used by Toyota for years now. New product development at Toyota involves the suppliers and major work of NPD is done by the suppliers.

    One more interesting factor I realized while reading the book. When we say “one customer at a time” and “managing customer relation in Marketing”, this concept was far more ingrained in the Lean system of sales even in 60s. So beyond Operations the Lean system has been a pioneer in Marketing and Sales too.

    Still after praising the book I am of the opinion that there would be some method which will change the game even further. The question to ask is when and how (which I contemplated earlier)?

  • A tree is only as strong as its roots







    Have you heard this saying before?

    This is the second blog in the series of … wait for it… (updated on Jan 2013) Connecting the dots – innovation

    Well, to continue from the earlier blogs – Cricket… here I am to write the next in one which takes off from the Amar Chitra Katha.

    Why Amar Chitra Katha? Because it relates to me on two levels. One on Business and the other the Buddha… As an innovation consultant I observed that innovative ideas not necessarily become successful revenue source. There could be many reasons for the same. One most important point for constant innovation and healthy top/bottom line is understanding the customer, understanding their overt and covert needs. That is what Uncle Pai could do with the concept of Amar Chitra Katha. No doubt he had a noble cause at the center. However, he also knew the need gap and could fulfill the same. So effectively, he was one who could understand the consumer insight and voice of the customer.

    I loved reading the comic and magazines by him and I was unfortunate that even though I lived in Dadar for a long time I could never meet him and when I heard about his sad demise I was not in India.

    Part two of Amar Chitra Katha is the Buddha. Again reiterating the fact that when I say “the Buddha” I do not restrict myself to the Buddha only. This relates to every possible concept which connects us more on a higher plane above our made so called ‘religion’. Amar Chitra Katha was born for all round development of kids. Read any story it would be either for knowledge, imparting some lesson or last but not the least to develop the habit of reading. Uncle Pai took this root as an obvious path – stories are easy to remember, kids (at least that time – 60s-70s) used to hear stories (Dada Dadi ki kahaniya) – when Jatak tales were used by the Buddha why reinvent the wheel?

    A to Z mysteries 1, A to Z mysteries 2, A to Z mysteries 3, A to Z mysteries 4, A to Z mysteries 5, A to Z mysteries 6,

     

  • Book review







    Few years back I read books written by Dr Brian Weiss. Dr Weiss is a psychotherapist, had published papers in journals and was teaching in a University. During late 70s and early 80s his life changed complete, when he was treating one of her clients. The first book of Dr Weiss I read was based on this patients treatment, title of the book is – Many lives many masters. It is a good book, about Past lifes and past life regression methods. After reading the third book – Only love is real, I wrote the following review on . In total I read four books of Dr Weiss
    1. Many Lives Many Masters,
    2. Same Soul Many Bodies,
    3. Only Loves Is Real and
    4. Messages From The Masters exactly in the same order.

    I am of the opinion that everyone should read at least Many lives many masters and Only love is real. One point, when you read the books please do not think of your ideology or what you have been taught since childhood, just read the book. The review is below.

    You believe in past life or not… you can learn from this book, sometimes you can read it as a novel. But believe me you will not only love reading it but will understand the depth of the phenomenon called “LIFE”.

    I am more of a spiritual but not religious, still after reading the book I felt the depth of the teachings of the Buddha and Hindu-ism. Please do not go to the dogmatic belief of any religion when you are reading this review.

    It would be good if you read Same soul many bodies (its almost the Buddha teachings in chapters), when I read that I felt that Buddhas teachings are retold. I would say read “Only love is real” and do not ask me more, but I would say read it and understand the meaning deep meanings.. we are not just this life we are all eternal be happy… be loving.

    On the contrary is Ashtavakra Geeta. So do not get confused, do read at least Many lives many masters and Only love is real. When I read those books the books were expensive, I think they are relatively economical now through online.