BHAICHARA
Lalit Kaul
BhaiChara is a terminology that, in my opinion, cannot be
completely described by whatever vocabulary one may have. Therefore it may be
prudent to define it within certain context. It gets most profoundly defined
when all the creations are deemed to be the manifestations of the creator; the
relationship between 'Atma' and 'Parmatma'; as if there was essentially one and
the only one Energy source that got manifested in various types of energies.
This kind of bonding between the beings transcends all forms of religions and
discrimination. Sadly enough it does not work out in the real world of beings;
therefore this definition of BhaiChara is immaterial and irrelevant.
Fundamentally, every being has a very very small world of his own; that is the family. Sustenance of the family necessitates interaction with the outside world and its requirements define the geographical limits for the same. If it is so for a family, it is no different for a community, a caste, a society, and a nation state.
Therefore it basically may (should) define a working relationship between peoples, castes, communities, regions, and nation states; the one that meets with the requirements of all at par, that is to the satisfaction of all. The dynamics of such a relationship is not immutable ( unchangeable/ unchallengeable)with time because, over a period of time, the most enterprising amongst them may come to dictate terms to the rest.
Therefore BhaiChara, I suppose, is best left to be defined/re-defined by the evolving societies, because its very content is bound to be transformed as societies transform themselves from a present state to some futuristic state. It cannot be a predefined notion; a dogma.
Fundamentally, every being has a very very small world of his own; that is the family. Sustenance of the family necessitates interaction with the outside world and its requirements define the geographical limits for the same. If it is so for a family, it is no different for a community, a caste, a society, and a nation state.
Therefore it basically may (should) define a working relationship between peoples, castes, communities, regions, and nation states; the one that meets with the requirements of all at par, that is to the satisfaction of all. The dynamics of such a relationship is not immutable ( unchangeable/ unchallengeable)with time because, over a period of time, the most enterprising amongst them may come to dictate terms to the rest.
Therefore BhaiChara, I suppose, is best left to be defined/re-defined by the evolving societies, because its very content is bound to be transformed as societies transform themselves from a present state to some futuristic state. It cannot be a predefined notion; a dogma.
