The task of peace-making requires not people representing state power or economic might, but people who believe in self-restraint, peace, and peace. Others who are engaged in talking about peace and the way of achieving it are powers in possession of nuclear weapons. Their talking of peace can be justified if they do so with a pure heart. But how significant peace talks will be if those involved are people who have neither nuclear weapons and who are both victims and agents of fear cannot promote world peace despite holding any number of conference and seminars, and turning out books after books and report after reports.
Acharya Tusi launched the Anuvarat Movement, a movement aimed at ushering in, and promoting, the values of morality. This is recogniazed by all, but one essential point has gone neglected so far. It is that the Anuvrat Movement is a new alternative means to achieve world peace. Its basic principles are that life is nothing but “self-restraint”. We strongly believe that no conferences and seminars, and turning out books after books and reports.
Acharya Tulsi launched the Anuvrat Movement, a movement aimed at ushering in, and promoting, the values of morality. This is recognized by all, but one essential point has gone neglected so far. It is that the Anuvrat Movement is a new alternative means to achieve world peace. Its basic principle is that life is nothing but "self-restraint." We strongly believe that no conferences or discussions on world peace can successful without imbibing those above principles. It needs profound thinking.
The present concept of peace is based merely on wars and post-war agreements. We get embroiled in them whenever question of peace and unrest are raised. In fact, they are consequences .We wants to hold on to consequences and to undo the consequences. We never pay attention to the basic cause. The consequences can never be done away with, without knowing the cause. You cannot destroy the consequence; you can only destroy the cause of the consequence. With it cause eliminated, the consequence will be automatically extirpated.
The first and foremost reason for the unrest in the world is that our education system is defective. The present – day education does not teach how to control one's emotions. An education system which does not teach how to control emotions and impulses always keeps open the danger of wars and unrest. Individuals as products of such a system neither themselves live in peace, nor let other live in peace. Therefore we must first examine the entire education system before we talk or world peace.
The second danger to world peace is the notion of development. No limit has been set to development. Nations, organization, and business establishments are proceeding on the assumption that there is no limit to development – no limit, restriction, or attempt to strike a balance of any kind. This concept of unlimited development is giving rise to innumerable problems and causing alarm bells to ring.
The third cause of world unrest is pollution of the environment. Here the problem is fewer goods and more consumers. The first principle of a pure environment is, "consume less since goods are limited." But today consumerism is fast increasing, it sound paradoxical to talk or world peace. We are simply at a loss to understand its grave consequences.
Let me relate a small tale. A car was proceeding towards a traffic constable at a crossroads, who signaled the driver to stop it. The latter said, "Why?" The constable replied," you are driving without lights." The driver said, "Keep away unless you want to be killed, since the car has no brakes either."
How dangerous can a car without lights and brakes be? Today our defective education system too seems to have got into a similar condition. It has neither endowed us with insight (inner light), nor has it equipped us with the ability to control emotions (brakes). No wonder, present-day individuals can be highly dangerous. Is it appropriate to talk about world peace under these conditions?
ANUVARAT AND WORLD Peace can be anew alternative before the world. Atomic bombs and world peace has been the subject of massive discussions. Now there is new preposition or hypothesis before the world –atomic vows (Anuvart or small vows) and world peace. There should be no doubt that there can be no world peace without observing the principle of restraint put forward by Anuvrat. We wear a mask. Some people think that it might be a cover to hide oral surgery. But it is a symbol of restraint. I want to suggest that let all those inclined to discuss world peace use this mask at least for an hour a let them put out a message that other people should use it too. We want to establish peace through restraint. Number of conferences, take out rallies, undertake long travels, and organize occasions the mask so that it may symbolically tell the people that you dream of world peace shall not be realized merely through discussion, speeches, and other forms of deliberation. All efforts to usher in world peace will be futile as long as people have no faith in restraint on our speech. Unrestrained speech becomes a major cause of unrest. Very often people cause provocation simply by using unrestrained language. Are we entitled to talk about world peace even when we have no control on our speech and mind and if we are overambitious? We put no restraint on the good s we consume. Will it be possible to keep talking about world peace even when we are at the same time trying to dominate the markets? In view of all these things, I believe that man committed to nonviolence is truly a symbol of self-restraint. And it is only a symbol self-restraint which will be a symbol of world peace. People having faith in world peace and use it when ever the occasion relates to world peace. It will appear to be surprising, curious, and new, but it will help us promote our line of thinking.
We will also have to consider a new question for attaining world peace. Shall we take recourse to science or spirituality? Science is making available to us many things. In fact, Science has become so dominant that we call the present the age of science. Shall we seek refuge in science? Shall we seek refuge in spiritually which has no arms or weapons, swords, or atomic bombs to boast of? It has only the felling of unity with all beings, the feeling that impels us, to treat all others as one would treat oneself – the feeling of equality – which is true spiritually. The enlightened intellectuals of today shall make use of science, but shall not seek refuge in it. We will have to seek refuge in spirituality if we really want world peace. It is not utilization, but practical to do so. Therefore let us first decide what we shall put to use and what we shall seek refuge in.
There are nine questions relating to world peace. I have prepared a written statement on the m. Apart from that what I wan to discuss is how useful our discussion on world peace will be and what its outcome will be. I am faced with its question also. Since I know its true answer, I want to present a different point of view before you. The United Nations was conceived after the Second World War and the organization came into being. People ideologically opposed to each other sit together there, deliberate on common matters, and try to solve the problems of the world. If nations believing in violence and the power of arms can sit together and deliberate, is it not necessary that all those individuals and organizations believing in morality, restraint, nonviolence, and world peace get together and establish and organization where they sit together to discuss the problem of violence, immorality, and unrest, and find a new way of solving it, so that their voice becomes so loud and compelling that even believers in violence may have to think afresh
I want to further clarify the above point. The contemplated organization shall not belong to any religion or sect. In fact, it will not at all discuss matters connected with sects and religions. It should address itself to nonviolence, world peace, and universal moral values, and eventually emerge as a third force. We have economic power and state power; we should now build moral power. In the absence of the third, the other two powers are becoming arbitrarily irresponsible. There is nothing to control them. On their basis, head of state some fifty to a hundreds people, wielding power, decide the fate of the world among themselves, they have no humanitarian concerns at all. Therefore there is all the more need for developing a third force. Without it the dream of world peace shall not be realized. For once, we should overlook arms and wars while discussing world peace or not? Is there peace in the family or not? Is there peace in the nation or not? First the individual, then the family, then the community and the nation, and finally, the world ahs to be considered in relation to peace. On the contrary, we directly go to world peace and overlook all other stages. It may not be termed a folly but it cannot be said to be wisdom either and, as result, world peace will not be able to be established.
CHANAKYA HAS BEEN a very great Indian policeman. at that time it was the Nand dynasty which ruled and the war was on . Chanakya once went to a village and stayed with an old woman. At meal time the old woman served a dish made of mixture of boiled pulse and rice. Chanakya thrust his hand in the bowl full of boiling pulse and rice. Chanakya thrust his hand in the bowl full of boiling hot mixture and scalded it .The old woman said, "You seen to be a foolish as Chanakya. " Chanakya asked, "How am foolish like Chanakya, you should have begun eating the mixture at the middle would have cooled. Your put your hand straight into middle of the boiling mixture an therefore your hand was scalded. This is exactly what Chanakya is doing. Nand Empire is so big and Chanakya repeatedly attacks its capital Pataliputra in the heart of the empire and is defeated every time. If he had begun overrunning small border villages and held attached patliputra only after gaining adequate strength and expanding his army, it would have been a wise step.
Are all those talking about world peace today not foolish, like Chanakya? They come straight to nuclear weapons like Chanakya thrusting his hand right in the middle of boiling pulse-rice mixture. We should start from the margins- from the peace of the individual and gradually we should start from the margins – from the peace of individual and gradually we should extend it to the whole world. But we ignore the margins, are drawn into the vortex of problems, and end up gaining nothing and harming the cause.
I would like to tell all my peace-loving brothers to forget world peace for once and talk about our own peace. Anuvrat does not talk directly of world peace. It is an exercise in the power of resolution. It awakens he power to resolve. Let us all talk about developing the power of resolution. We need not discuss world peace at conference. We should better talk about the first brick to be laid for building the grand mansion of world peace. One can build a home without a foundation, but it will be a dangerous structure. We should talk about the basic foundation. We should begin with our own individual power. For that it is necessary that we try to understand the basic idea of Anuvrat, that is, we should first of all try to develop our power of resolution.
Anuvrat has formulated a few basic principles to ensure world peace:
- I will not kill any innocent creature.
- I will not indulge in inessential violence.
- I will not attack anyone.
- I will not support the aggressive mentality.
- I will not behave cruelly with any man or other living being.
Will these cruel acts succeed in saving man? Man will not be saved by cruelty. On the other hand, cruelty will grow increasingly and men will kill one anther. Abandoning cruel behavior is the basic principle of world peace.
In the light of anuvrat, world peace can be based on the following two resolves:
(i) I will set a limit to individual possessions.
(ii) I will set a limit to the consumption of goods.
I will ask just one question: Can my brothers be ready to accept the above vows Anuvrat?
Norway is a very affluent nation. Will it be possible there to limit individual possession and consumption?
By accepting these vows, you would be able to tell people that you have the strength, whereby you would be able to promote the cause of world peace.