Methinks that it is in the human nature to advise the others. It might be a wish to right the wrong, or to boost one’s ego (the advise-giver usually occupies a superior position or at least, a superior state of mind, at least as far they’re concerned). And there must be various subgroups in these two categories. No doubt this topic has been studied by philosophers and perhaps psychologists as well. Oftentimes, one criticises the others just for the kick of it, and this takes the form of advice, of course: let me tell you what you ought to be doing, because obviously what you’re doing is not right or not done in the right way. And your thoughts are all wrong, let me tell you how to think, because I know better for this or that reason. How much of all this is constructive, I sometimes wonder.
Even the most well-meaning advice becomes useless, or worse, counterproductive, when not offered appropriately: with the right words and tone, at the right time and place. But who considers these things in these days of social media, a virtual world with walls of anonymity behind which one hides one’s identity? A world that allows one to vent without having to face the consequences that one would in the real world? For behind the mask of anonymity and carrying the sword of self-righteousness, one can spit the sort of things one would’t dream of uttering in someone’s (actual) presence. Places like Twitter are so abrasive and gratuitously abusive that I once left within days after signing up. Guys, keep your venom to yourselves and marinate in it.
When it comes to writing something or doing something even vaguely religious in nature, there are invariably reactions from self-appointed warriors to tell you absolutely exactly what you should or shouldn’t do. That you were wrong, because there is some shastric rule mentioned in the 19th Purāṇa or in the 5th adhyāya of the Śrībhāṣya to back it up! Even if there were (there often isn’t) maybe they should remember that we don’t live in the medieval times? That their opinion is actually a fact that everyone should share and abide by? And that their approach to righting the wrong is not going to be in anyway constructive? What makes them think that others should listen to them, especially if they’re going to be unpleasant about it? And when will people learn that there isn’t just one truth but different versions of it and different aspects, depending from where you see it? When will those people become modest enough to recognise that they don’t have the exclusive custody of knowledge and “proper” behaviour? Gosh, I’m ranting.
All this made me look into the Viduranīti, and there’s a whole chapter on good advice. I seemed to remember Velukkudi Swami explaining that we should NEVER give advice without being solicited first. Gosh, so many people would lose their most favourite hobby in that case! I actually couldn’t find the exact idea in the Viduranīti itself. What I found instead is a list of qualities that a person ought to have if we hope to approach them for good advice:
This verse says how to approach a proper person to seek advice: this clearly insinuates that if not approached, one ought not to give advice. Full stop. Also, the advice-giver ought to have the qualities of being someone’s friend, and be eminently wise, virtuous, well-learned and so forth. Who in this virtual world of social media (who uses social media) has all this? Who has approached them honouring them, seeking them advice?
I sometimes wonder what the other texts says about advice? Any ideas? Now what to do with unsolicited advice from people you barely know? And what of the “advice” is aggressive, unpleasantly formulated and/or pompous (among other things?) Well, what’s there to do but to reflect upon human nature, ignore those comments, write a blog post, and vow not to be like them?
suganyasmusingsscribblings.wordpress.com 