Unconditional Love Vs Universal Love

A few years ago, during one of his discourses, my Guruji enlightened the attendees that the universe is called ‘adana pradana shala’, which meant that in this world, everything survives by exchange only and that none can live peacefully by holding on to his possessions or restraining himself without sharing his wealth and support by way of service to society. Every person longs to live happily forever, but to live happily, one should not have tall boundary walls built around him. In fact, one should not build any boundary at all. One has to ‘give’ to the needy in order to ‘get’ to achieve eternal peace, failing which nature shall forcefully wrest all the wealth and peace away from us, by which time we might not even have a second chance to correct our blunders. As said, one should be fortunate to assimilate such preachings of a enlightened Guru and it poured into my ears just at the right juncture when I was looking for a solution in life, after which I put the mitigator doctrine into practice in all directions wherever possible, both professionally as well socially which ultimately unknotted many of my chronic issues, giving me peace. To give away, one has to perform the act without expecting anything in return, neither praise nor favour. It should be ’without any single condition’ and it should also be ‘whole-hearted’ with love.

The moment we hear the word ‘unconditional love’ our mind pictures the love showered by a mother on her child. The ‘Unconditional Love’ of a mother is undisputed and may not necessarily be cited, for we all know how great our mothers are/were. In return, when the young-ones grow up and do not reciprocate the parent in equal parlance with such unconditional love, the mother or father does not abuse the child, instead bears with it but continues to extend such love however old the child grows. Well, it's all personal agenda and conditional, but when the mother extends her very same unconditional love towards a child other than her own, then it is ‘special’ indeed. It becomes more profound when a mother extends such love to someone other than her child in equal parlance. Mothers are a source of energy, inspiration and strength, but it has little value when she restricts such love to her own blood and not to others. Such restricted love might be ‘unconditional’ but in fact it is only ‘conditional love’ and nothing but a manifestation of selfishness. Paradoxically, such so-called unconditional love also exists in the animal species, which are called ‘beasts’ in general. So, what’s great or special about humans extending such bondage to their offspring? Even the monkey does it.

In the same manner, affluent societies maintain exotic pets, such as parrots, Siamese cats or breed dogs such as terriers, hounds or spaniels, but mostly to keep up their image and not for the actual love for animals. These exotic pets are maintained as a status symbol, but what defines their true love is when they look at the common mongrel or the street dog with sympathy. When the human extends his or her love towards helpless persons or animals, it demonstrates ‘universal love’ without any conditions. Recently, I had the opportunity to get to know two such great women, Mrs Vishal, who is located in Bengaluru, and Mrs Kamna from Chennai.

Mrs Vishal has a fluffy Havanese breed dog named Cash and she continuously talks to her as if she is also one of her children, enquiring what she wants, why she did not have her meal etc. Apart from that, Mrs Vishal and her husband Mr Manu have adopted six to seven stray dogs that linger in the street outside their apartment complex. Before they leave for the office, they cook food for the stray dogs and soon after they return home in the evening, both husband and wife pack the food in carriers along with drinking water and go feed the dogs. I was amazed by their daily ritual — at 5pm they hit the street and serve food in individual plates and serve the stray dogs a meal of rice or ragi with minced chicken. The stray dogs are named Rusty, Rani, Bhaira, Charlie, William and Salman. The names were given as per their colour, gender and conduct. I was curious about the names and they informed me that Rusty was given the name because of his colour and Salman was given the name because he has a rather manly gait, like Salman Khan. They take their stray pets for regular medical check-up and vaccinations whenever required.

And then there’s another compassionate lady, Mrs Kamna, who takes care of ‘Prem’s World’ immaculately. She has two children and a total of 5 dogs in her house and another 4 just outside, and 2 cats that make regular appearances for their daily meals. Unlike Mrs Vishal who resides in an apartment, Kamna lives with her in-laws in an independent house, hence she has no trouble from anyone objecting to her pets. Her canine pets include a Shih Tzu, a Labrador (that is her in-laws’), and three adopted mongrels. Even her husband loves pets and, in fact, when they married he had two dogs and hers was the third. Thereafter, they adopted another one, the only puppy that survived from a litter that one of their street dogs delivered. Kamna, as science student, dreamt of becoming a Veterinarian but somehow missed the opportunity, but her compassion towards animals of all species, right from snakes, crocodiles, cats, etc., has known no bounds. Kamna and her friends even volunteered at the famous Madras Crocodile Bank Trust during their college days, cleaning the crocodile pits without any fear or trepidation. Kamna provides all the necessary healthcare to her pets in equal proportions as she extends to her own children. Today, Kamna’s pets treat her as their mother and they sleep along with her and husband in their bedroom. Mrs Vishal and Kamna are exceptional people who demonstrate ‘Universal Love’. The amount of time they spend on their adopted ones is no lesser than what they contribute to their own children.

At this juncture I cannot avoid mentioning my uncle Late Sri PG Banerjee, who after the death of his uncle Pothina Ganapathi Rao in 1958, left his home angrily when his mother objected to sharing the family property of the two cinema halls with his cousins, the sons of Late Ganapathi Rao. Only after my uncle’s terms were accepted in the presence of elders like Sri Naidu of Brahmaiah & Co, and a HUF (Hindu Undivided Family) partnership was drawn with equal shares to the sons of Sri Srinivasa Rao and Late Ganapathi Rao, did my uncle return home. He was an exceptional personality. I behaved uncharitably without any gratitude when my uncle blamed me unreasonably and I retaliated by dragging our dispute to court. This guilt remains with me. My uncle’s contention was that even though his father was instrumental in establishing two cinema halls, all the goodwill earned by the joint family was only due to his uncle Ganapathi Rao whose selfless service to the society and the nation during the freedom struggle was unparalleled.

Here, I wish to quote Late Shri JRD Tata, the true Bharat Ratna, who advised Mrs Sudha Murty, who was once employed as the first female engineer hired at India's largest auto manufacturer TATA Engineering, and the advice she got from JRD Tata when she resigned to assist her husband Narayana Murthy to start up the company Infosys was to “remember that no-one is the owner of money. You are only a trustee of money and it always changes hands. When you are successful, give it back to society that gave you so much goodwill”.

There is also the greedy love that one’s own progeny should be wealthy and powerful, and not others. The bottom line and theme of the epic Mahabharata is that though King Dhritarashtra, the father who is filled with unconditional love towards his son Duryodhana, ultimately died of sorrow and misery because it was interwoven with greed. Hence, how can such love with conditions be termed as ‘unconditional love’ where the parent desires her own should thrive and others should not? Such love cannot be acclaimed as ‘great’ when simultaneously you ‘hate’ someone who deserves such love in equal parlance. King Dhritarashtra restricted and fortified his love conditionally, extending it to his own sons especially towards Duryodhana. Contrarily, King Pandu sacrificed his entire kingdom to his brother and chose to retreat to the forests, leaving his royal luxuries. The very same ‘Unconditional Love’ was extended further by Kunti, the first wife of King Pandu. When Pandu died suddenly due to a curse, his second wife Madri sacrificed herself in his funeral pyre, taking the blame for her husband’s death, thereafter her twins Nakula and Sahadeva were raised by Kunti with more care and love than she showered on her own sons, Yuddishtara, Bheema and Arjuna.

Not only did Kunti extend her unconditional love towards her stepsons, Nakula and Sahadeva, but she demonstrated her ‘Universal Love’ at the end by serving King Dhritarashtra and Queen Gandhari in the final days in ‘Vanaprasta’, the royal’s retreat, as they were blind and helpless. Kunti, despite the Pandava Princes becoming victorious in the epic Kurukshetra battle and despite her son Yuddhishtara being coronated as the King of Kuru Kingdom, did not crave for the royal luxuries but preferred to attend to the blind King and his Queen whose sons were instrumental for the misery and agony of her sons since their childhood. The sacrifice and love of Kunti for the aged Kaurava royal couple, who were in grief, is immeasurable and cannot be compared to any human sacrifice. Kunti died along with Dhritarashtra and Gandhari in a forest fire in the end. There is no greater character in Mahabharata than Kunti in my view.

Mother Nature manifests the said doctrine of give and take in this universe which is only a ‘adana pradana shala’, hence it is necessary to apply ‘Universal Love’ at all stages as the true religion, failing which we alone shall be responsible for the misery we face in the later years.