Bhagavad Geeta, summary of Vedic philosophy

I like Sanskrit as a subject of study. I recall in 8^th standard we studied first time, the subject had weightage equivalent of only 25 marks. We were taught ‘Shubhasheet’, verses of wisdom may be around 5 in a period every week. I recall I would have them by heart with meaning, when the period would end. I scored 25/25 in 8^th standard. This is just to provide evidence that I liked that subject. My siblings also were as interested and demonstrated same prowess.

There is another evidence. I took one external exam each year to learn beyond what was taught in the class. That is were I was introduced to Bhagwat Geeta (The Song of God) and could get opportunity to memorize chapters 12 and 15 and understand meanings. I believe the love for this language of God and that of Hindu scriptures was inherited from paternal genes.

Today, I was reflecting on some discussions with a learned relative about the concept and principles of Karm, and realized I have got some introduction to Bhakti, through chapter 12 of Bhagwat Geeta (Bhakti Yog, The Yog of Devotion) and to Gnyan, through exposure to chapter 2 (Sānkhya Yog : The Yog of Analytical Knowledge), over a period of time, but have not had opportunity to understand what does the Geeta say about Karm.

I have followed Swami Mukundanand’s commentary for understanding the God’s words. In the process of looking for knowledge on Karm contained in chapter 3 (Karm Yog, The Yog of Action), I came to get impressive introduction to Bhagwat Geeta.

Swamiji explains that ‘The Prasthān Trayī’, or the three pillars of Vedic thought, comprise the Upanishads, the Brahma Sutras, and the Bhagavad Geeta. These texts are central to understanding the depth and breadth of Vedic philosophy.

The Upanishads form the philosophical core of the Vedas, exploring profound concepts related to the nature of reality, the self, and the ultimate truth, or Brahman. Renowned for their depth and spiritual insight, the Upanishads have been highly regarded by philosophers worldwide. Arthur Schopenhauer, a prominent German philosopher, praised the Upanishads as one of the most elevating philosophies, providing solace throughout his life. Paul Deussen, another German thinker, acknowledged the Upanishads for their clear expression of eternal philosophical truths. However, the complex and abstract nature of these texts makes them challenging for the average person to fully grasp.

To address the complexity of the Upanishads, the Brahma Sutras were composed by Ved Vyas. This text serves as a systematic summary and philosophical conclusion of the Upanishads, earning the name “Vedant,” meaning the culmination of Vedic thought. The Brahma Sutras are highly concise, often leading to various interpretations and making them difficult to understand without deep study.

The Bhagavad Geeta, by contrast, is more accessible and provides a clear and practical summary of Vedic philosophy. Known as the “Song of God,” it presents a dialogue between Lord Krishna and the warrior Arjun on the battlefield of the Mahabharat. This conversation addresses fundamental questions about duty, righteousness, and the nature of the self, offering guidance that is both spiritual and practical.

Unlike many theories in disciplines such as economics, psychology, or sociology, which are often revised or discarded over time, the wisdom of the Bhagavad Geeta has endured for over fifty centuries. Its teachings have inspired a wide range of thinkers, including Mahatma Gandhi, physicist Robert Oppenheimer, psychologist Carl Jung, and writers like Herman Hesse and Aldous Huxley. The lasting relevance of the Geeta suggests its divine origin, transcending the limitations of human intellect and continuing to provide guidance to seekers of truth across the ages.

I have started reading, understanding and digesting what chapter 3 teaches us. Let me see if I can understand.

Reactions Vs Proactions - Cause and Effect

I read somewhere that observing comes naturally to all animals, not just to human beings. 

New Caledonian crows can guess the weight of an object by watching how it behaves in the wind, according to an international team of researchers. The findings, published in Proceedings of the Royal Society B, are the first of their kind in a non-human animal.

Humans use a variety of cues to gauge an object’s weight without directly handling it, including how easily it can be moved. For instance, if we see one object blowing down the street in the wind while another object remains stationary, we can infer which object is heavier. 

This beginning has nothing to do with what follows. I am building my defense. I am criticized in some quarters to be over doing this observation bit and more when I talk about observing my own behavior, which does not mean correcting the misbehavior, though.

I have observed and tried to analyze type of activity state, we are normally in. Such states are inaction, actions for life support, reaction and proaction. First two are constants and unavoidable for biologically human, but the time allotted two, reactions and proactions, vary. My observation is we are reactive more than we are proactive, generally. Reactions which i am focussing on are natural consequences of various external stimuli. Stimuli could be positive or negative, flattering or irritating.  And reactions could vary from withdrawal to aggression to violence, depending on how irritable I am and how strongly irritating is the stimulus. Such irritating stimuli could be noise in the surroundings, indisciplined traffic, nature's fury and i will look for studies related to reactions to irritants beyond our control, in the next part.

I looked for studies about what prompts, motivates and results into higher chances of reactive behavior, specifically to irritating stimuli. And i found that there are several studies that explore what prompts and motivates reactive behavior, particularly in response to irritating stimuli. This area of research is often examined in psychology, neuroscience, and behavioral science. The findings highlight various factors that can lead to increased reactivity, especially in the context of irritants or stressors.

1. Psychological Triggers:

   - Perceived Threat or Injustice: When individuals perceive a situation as threatening or unjust, they are more likely to react impulsively. This perception can be shaped by past experiences, personality traits, or even temporary emotional states. For example, someone who feels wronged may react defensively or aggressively to even minor irritations.

   - Cognitive Load: High cognitive load, such as multitasking or being overwhelmed with information, can lower an individual’s threshold for irritation. When mental resources are stretched thin, people are more likely to respond reactively to additional stressors because they have less capacity to process the situation calmly.

2. Biological and Neurological Factors:

   - Amygdala Activation: The amygdala, a part of the brain involved in emotional processing, plays a key role in reactive behavior. When the amygdala is highly activated, particularly in response to fear or anger, it can lead to immediate, reflexive reactions to irritating stimuli. This is often referred to as the "fight or flight" response.

   - Hormonal Influences: Stress hormones like cortisol can heighten reactivity. Elevated cortisol levels, often due to chronic stress, can make individuals more prone to irritation and less able to regulate their emotions, leading to more reactive behaviors.

3. Environmental and Contextual Factors:

   - Chronic Stress or Fatigue: Individuals under chronic stress or who are fatigued are more likely to respond reactively to irritants. The constant strain can lower resilience and make even small irritations feel overwhelming.

   - Social and Cultural Norms: In some social or cultural contexts, reactive behavior may be more accepted or even encouraged, particularly in response to perceived slights or disrespect. This can reinforce a cycle of reactivity where individuals are conditioned to respond aggressively or defensively to irritation.

4. Personality Traits and Individual Differences:

   - Trait Neuroticism: Individuals with higher levels of neuroticism, a personality trait associated with emotional instability and anxiety, are more prone to reactive behavior. They tend to have lower tolerance for irritants and may react more strongly to perceived slights or annoyances.

   - Impulsivity: Those with impulsive tendencies are more likely to engage in reactive behavior. Impulsivity can result from both genetic factors and environmental influences, and it often manifests as a quick, unconsidered response to irritation.

5. Behavioral Conditioning:

   - Past Reinforcement: Reactive behavior can be reinforced through past experiences where such responses were rewarded or at least not punished. For example, if someone has learned that reacting aggressively to irritants leads to the removal of the irritant or gains them some form of control, they are more likely to continue reacting in that way.

   - Learned Helplessness: On the flip side, individuals who feel powerless in the face of irritating stimuli may react out of frustration or desperation. This is often seen in environments where people have little control over their circumstances.

6. Situational Factors:

   - Lack of Control: Situations where individuals feel a lack of control can increase the likelihood of reactive behavior. When people cannot change or escape an irritating situation, they may react impulsively as a way to cope with the discomfort.

   - Social Provocation: Direct provocations, especially in social settings, are significant triggers for reactive behavior. If someone feels provoked or insulted, they are more likely to respond aggressively or defensively.

I have further observed that reactive behaviour does not mean benefits to me. On the contrarory it harms me only, physically as also psychologically. It distrubs me and distroys my peace. Reactive behavior, particularly in response to irritating stimuli, is influenced by a combination of psychological, biological, and environmental factors. Understanding these triggers can help in developing strategies to manage reactivity, such as through stress reduction, emotional regulation techniques, and mindfulness practices. By recognizing the factors that lead to heightened reactivity,  i can work towards more thoughtful and measured responses, even in the face of irritation.

Logical next step was to study how does being reactive hampers and how does proactivity helps. I found that the distinction between reactive and proactive activities has been the subject of various studies, especially in fields like psychology, behavioral economics, and management. The findings summarized below highlight the benefits of bing less reactive and more proactive:

1. Behavioral Studies on Reactivity vs. Proactivity:

   - Reactivity: Reactive behavior is typically triggered by external stimuli, often leading to immediate responses without much deliberation. While reactivity can be beneficial in situations requiring quick action (e.g., in emergencies), it can lead to stress, burnout, and poor decision-making when over-relied upon.

   - Proactivity: Proactive behavior involves anticipatory actions where individuals take control of situations by planning and preparing ahead. Proactivity is associated with better outcomes in personal and professional contexts because it allows for thoughtful decision-making, reduces stress, and promotes long-term success.

2. Studies in Workplace Settings:

   - Impact on Job Performance: Research has shown that employees who engage in proactive behaviors are more likely to excel in their roles. Proactivity is linked to higher job satisfaction, better performance, and greater career advancement opportunities. In contrast, a reactive approach often leads to feeling overwhelmed and less satisfied with one’s job.

   - Organizational Benefits: Proactive organizations tend to be more innovative and adaptable. Encouraging proactivity among employees can lead to a more resilient and forward-thinking workforce.

3. Psychological Implications:

   - Stress and Well-being: Reactive behaviors, especially when driven by constant stimuli or pressures, can lead to chronic stress and reduced well-being. Proactive individuals, who plan and manage their time effectively, tend to experience lower levels of stress and better overall mental health.

   - Emotional Regulation: Studies suggest that proactive people are better at regulating their emotions, as they are less likely to be caught off guard by unexpected situations. This emotional stability contributes to healthier relationships and improved social interactions.

4. Educational and Developmental Perspectives:

   - Teaching Proactivity: Educational programs that focus on developing proactive behaviors in students and young professionals have been shown to improve their problem-solving skills, critical thinking, and self-efficacy. These traits are crucial for success in various life domains.

   - Habit Formation: Habit formation research indicates that individuals can train themselves to be more proactive through practices like goal setting, time management, and mindfulness. Over time, these practices can shift a person’s default mode from reactive to proactive.

The balance between reactivity and proactivity is critical for overall well-being and success. While reactive behaviors are sometimes necessary, fostering a proactive mindset can lead to better long-term outcomes. Studies consistently show that proactive individuals and organizations are more resilient, innovative, and effective in their pursuits.

Let me look for ways and means of being proactive and what wise men suggest. It is never too late, even at the age of 78 years.

How To Address Others, Does It Matter?

Corona has changed the life at workplace. I have been not just advised but at times instructed not to come to office. The instructions are more out of love, affection and care for an old man, otherwise susceptible to infections and viruses.

That has converted all meetings virtual, to an extent that those in office also connect from their workstations!! This has also resulted into delayed acquaintances with new team members. And you can not blame that young, new member of the team who has not seen my grey hair and balding head, nor heard my guttural tone, if he, when he joins that virtual meeting and reads name in the box I occupy, Atul Mankad, addresses me as “Hi, Atul, we have not met”. And that addressing me by first name pulls him down in my esteem.

I have, in old days, when I was still old, been nasty at times and have told and at times written to such young person that “I prefer being addressed as Mr Mankad”. As a result, barring such brand new joinee, those who are very close to me and relatively older call me ‘Atulbhai’ or ‘ARM’, the others address me as ‘Mr Mankad’ or just ‘Sir’.

Today, having had similar experience, I wondered, from where and when do young children learn to address others?  Are they taught how does one demonstrate respect for others, even when the other person does not deserve respect?

I looked for information based on studies in social sciences. I framed following prompts:

1.      We find people addressing each other depending on intimacy or nature of relationship, differently. What are different cultural overtones as they relate to addressing others? 

2.      Generational overtones are observed surpassing traditional cultural nuances. Are there corroborating studies or evidences?

3.      Are there studies to evaluate effect on psychology of people of older generations cohabitating with millennials at Workplaces?

After trying to collate responses from multiple AI Bots, the information provided by ChatGPT sounds comprehensive and logical.

Please read on. It is always good to be aware and make our children aware:

The way people address each other varies significantly across cultures and is often influenced by factors such as intimacy, social hierarchy, and cultural norms. Here are a few examples of how different cultures approach forms of address:

1. Japan:

   - Suffixes: Japanese people often use honorifics (suffixes) to show respect and the nature of their relationship. For example, "-san" is a common respectful suffix, "-sama" is more respectful and formal, and "-kun" and "-chan" are used for close friends or younger people.

   - Titles and Last Names: It is common to address someone by their last name followed by a suffix, especially in formal settings. First names are usually reserved for close friends and family.

2. United States:

   - First Names: Americans often use first names even in professional settings, which reflects a more casual and egalitarian culture.

   - Titles: In formal or professional contexts, titles like "Mr.", "Mrs.", "Dr." followed by the last name are used.

3. France:

   - Formal vs. Informal: The use of "vous" (formal 'you') and "tu" (informal 'you') is important in French. Addressing someone as "vous" shows respect and distance, while "tu" indicates closeness and familiarity.

   - Titles: Titles such as "Monsieur", "Madame", and "Mademoiselle" are used in more formal interactions.

4. India:

   - Respect for Elders: It's common to address elders and authority figures with titles such as "Uncle", "Auntie", or "Sir/Madam" even if they are not related.

   - First Names and Nicknames: Among peers and friends, first names or affectionate nicknames are often used.

5. China:

   - Titles and Surnames: In formal settings, people are often addressed by their title (e.g., "Manager Li") or surname followed by a respectful term.

   - Family Terms: It is common to address people with familial terms like "Aunt", "Uncle", even if they are not family.

6. Germany:

   - Formality: Germans tend to be more formal, using "Herr" (Mr.) or "Frau" (Mrs./Ms.) followed by the last name in professional and formal contexts.

   - First Names: First names are usually reserved for close friends and family.

These cultural nuances highlight the importance of understanding and respecting different ways of addressing others, which can help in building better interpersonal relationships and avoiding misunderstandings.

Generational differences in forms of address and communication styles have been observed and studied across various cultures, indicating shifts that sometimes surpass traditional cultural nuances. Here are some studies and evidences:

1. Shift Towards Informality:

   - A study by the Pew Research Center found that younger generations, particularly Millennials and Gen Z, are more comfortable with informal communication styles and addressing people by their first names, even in professional settings. This trend reflects a broader cultural shift towards egalitarianism and away from hierarchical norms .

2. Workplace Communication:

   - Research published in the Journal of Intercultural Communication indicates that generational differences in the workplace can lead to varying expectations about communication and addressing colleagues. Younger employees often prefer less formal communication, which can sometimes clash with older colleagues' expectations of formality and respect .

3. Technology and Communication:

   - The rise of digital communication platforms has also influenced how different generations address each other. A study by the International Journal of Business Communication highlighted that younger generations, who are more accustomed to texting and social media, often use more casual language and abbreviations, even in professional emails and messages .

4. Globalization and Cultural Exchange:

   - A report by the World Economic Forum noted that globalization and the increased mobility of younger generations have led to a blending of cultural practices. Younger people are more likely to adopt communication styles from different cultures, leading to a mix of traditional and modern forms of address .

5. Education and Socialization:

   - Research by the Journal of Sociolinguistics found that educational institutions are significant in shaping communication styles. Younger generations exposed to diverse and multicultural environments in schools and universities are more likely to adopt informal and inclusive ways of addressing others, reflecting broader societal changes.

These studies and reports suggest that generational overtones indeed play a significant role in shaping communication practices, often surpassing traditional cultural norms. The increasing preference for informality, the influence of digital communication, and the impact of globalization are key factors driving these changes.

There are several studies that have evaluated the psychological effects on older generations cohabitating with Millennials in the workplace. These studies explore aspects such as job satisfaction, stress levels, communication challenges, and intergenerational dynamics. Here are some key findings from relevant research:

1. Intergenerational Conflict and Stress:

   - A study published in the Journal of Organizational Behavior found that intergenerational conflict can lead to increased stress and decreased job satisfaction among older employees. The differences in work values, communication styles, and expectations can create tension, particularly when younger employees challenge traditional practices and hierarchies .

2. Positive Intergenerational Interactions:

   - Research from the Journal of Applied Psychology indicated that positive interactions between generations can enhance job satisfaction and reduce stress. When older and younger employees engage in mentoring relationships, knowledge sharing, and collaborative projects, it can lead to a more inclusive and supportive work environment .

3. Adaptation and Flexibility:

   - A study in the International Journal of Human Resource Management highlighted that older employees who are adaptable and open to change experience less stress and higher job satisfaction when working with Millennials. The ability to embrace new technologies and flexible work practices is crucial for mitigating the negative effects of intergenerational differences .

4. Perceptions of Work Ethic:

   - Research in the Journal of Business and Psychology found that older generations often perceive Millennials as having a different work ethic, which can lead to misunderstandings and frustrations. However, when organizations foster an environment of mutual respect and understanding, these perceptions can be positively influenced, leading to better intergenerational cohesion .

5. Training and Development Program:

   - Studies have shown that training programs focused on improving intergenerational communication and collaboration can significantly reduce workplace stress and improve relationships between older and younger employees. These programs help bridge the gap by fostering mutual understanding and respect .

Overall, the research suggests that while there can be challenges associated with intergenerational cohabitation in the workplace, proactive strategies such as promoting positive interactions, fostering adaptability, and providing targeted training can mitigate negative effects and enhance the overall work environment.