If I were to answer this question a few decades ago then I would probably say in favour of it and would perhaps quote the example of Gandhiji along with many others, who not only fought for their principles but also lived up to them.
But in this contemporary (materialistic) era, it is quite unlikely to say that. An era, which has seen nothing less than cruelty and may have to witness a lot many facets of it in the near future. Still, the notorious activities of the present time do not and cannot undermine the validity of the fact that the two things can indeed go hand in hand as they did in the past.
Starting from Gandhiji, who is too great a man to be described in words. In fact mere words cannot suffice his achievements and his noble deeds towards the establishment of humanity. An epitome of truth, a disciple of Lord Ram and a pioneer of Non-Violence and Satyagraha are some of his few characteristics to mention. A pious mortal who, since childhood, believed in his thoughts and actions and invariably adhered to them. (This one is reminiscent of the stealing act of his childhood days). Did he not fight for his beliefs and principles and lived up to them? I think my being able to write this post in an atmosphere where I can enjoy my space and freedom forms the answer to my question mentioned above. Likewise, if we turn the pages of history we will come across several other distinguished men who worked on similar lines.
But would I not be wrong in saying that it is tough to find such men in today’s time? The world, I believe, is divided into two parts. Good and evil, each one of which lies on one side of the door. So now, let us peek on the other side of it. The door which opens to the world of mass killing in the name of religion, God, caste, creed etc. Would you not as well call such people a staunch follower of their principles? Are they not guided by their respective ideologies so much so that they successfully execute their brutal activities? I know I am contradicting my own statement that I stated above (that no such people exist) but I would rather do the honour myself of accepting to my fault (hope it is pardonable) than to let my readers pin point me.
The long and short of it, it is as much easier to live up to your principles as it is to fight for them provided the individual ought to be determined and focused.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Well...
ReplyDeleteI think, fight for principles and living up to them, though are not exactly same but are overlapping and similar to a large extent. Unless you are living up to a principle, you wouldn't fight for it. Also, if you are fighting for a principle, wouldn't you be living up to it.
Let's take Gandhi Ji's example. Not only did he live up to his principles, but he fought for them too in a non-violent way. On the other hand, people who kill innocents in the name of religion, caste, creed etc are also living up to their principles by fighting for them; in a violent way. Revolutionaries like Mangal Pandey and Bhagat Singh also, not only lived up to their principle of freedom, fought for it and even died for it.
So I think living up to and fighting for your principle is analogous.
Thanks for commenting Ozair.
ReplyDeleteWell I still don't agree with what you say. The examples you have quoted above are exemplary but if you talk in general sense then both the things may not go hand in hand.
Take for instance, I work with an NGO whose main motive is to inculcate a feeling of civic sense among people. To plead them to keep their city neat and clean. But if at the end of the day I myself dump the garbage of my house at a corner nearby then it simply means that I do not follow something which I believe in so strongly and fight for.
Thus, I still believe that there exist a very thin line of difference between the two.
Well... in your case I'd say that you should not work in that NGO.
ReplyDeleteBy the way... congratulations and keep up the good work. And try not to dump the garbage at the corner.