Ekalavya - Nirguna v/s Saguna

Ekalavya meditated on a concept of his 'Guru' Drona, learnt his lessons in archery in the Master's absence, and mastered the art. When his 'Guru' desired the thumb of Ekalavya's right hand as a fee,Ekalavya willingly sacrificed it. He demonstrated to the world what an aspirant could achieve in life if he has faith and respect in his master (even in his absence) and pursues his efforts.

While Arjuna had personally mastered archery from Drona, Ekalavya achieved equally impressive skills while meditating on the concept of his 'Guru' without his personal involvement. If he could not accomplish a particular technique, he would think about his 'Guru', present his problem and would wait in meditation till a solution appeared in his mind. He would then proceed further. Ekalavya's guru was without personal attributes, and Arjuna's guru was a person with attributes. However Ekalavya acquired skills matching or exceeding Arjuna's by faith and devotion. This story teaches us that faith opens doors to knowledge and gives answers even to the most difficult problems. It also teaches us the same results can be obtained by meditating on the formless as by devotion to the personal form with attributes.


Those with minds entered into Me, who unitively meditate
on Me, with a fervour pertaining to the Supreme, those
according to Me are the most unitively (attuned)in yoga.

But those who meditate upon the Imperishable, the
Undefineable, the Unmanifested, the All-Pervasive
and the Thought-transcending, the Firmly-established,
the Immobile, the Constant,having restrained all sense-aggregates,
regarding all with equalizing understanding, interested in the
well-being of all creatures, they reach Me too.


The 'Guru' Drona acknowledges that Ekalavya could seriously challenge Arjuna's status as the supreme archer, hence he asks for his right thumb. In this case, the 'Guru' is partial to the student who is devoted to him as a person and not to the student who meditates on a concept of him. The Lord however is not partial like Drona.

The only reason why he advocates the path of personal devotion to Arjuna is because Arjuna is more suited to this path, as proven by his devotion to his Guru Drona. In fact, Arjuna is so attached to the personal form of Drona that he is unable to come to terms with the fact that Drona is his worst enemy, and that Drona needs to be killed in order for justice to prevail. For a person with a different disposition, who attaches less significance to personal attributes, a different path would be more suitable.

Further, Krishna was personally present along with Arjuna throughout the war. Hence it made more sense for Arjuna to practice devotion to the personal form of Krishna rather than an abstract and formless concept, because guidance from the personal form would be instantaneous. Meditation on the formless would not be possible during battle, hence he would have to surrender to the personal form of Krishna with unwavering faith in order to perform his duty during the war.

Faith and Creation

Creating something new begins with a leap of faith. A leap of faith is not required to extract information, but it is required to create something new. One needs a certain amount of faith to even experiment with something new. A total absence of faith will keep one cautious and fearful of the unknown. Hence a person who lacks faith will only try things that have been verified in the past and lead a limited life. Creation or creativity will be even more difficult because the logical and rational left brain brain does not have any logical explanation for creativity, which is a right brain activity. Having blind faith that is not substantiated by either an external verification, third party verification, experience or insight can prove to be detrimental. However a total lack of faith in anything that is not directly verified is also detrimental. A balance of reasoning and faith is required to try some thing new and be successful at it.

In the Mahabharata, the first leap of faith that Arjuna takes towards becoming a good archer is his faith in his Guru. He trust his teacher and follows his instructions to his best, without any doubt. When the Guru asks him to do something, he does that and only that. When he asks him to aim at a bird, he focuses only on the bird and nothing else. This is because he has 100% faith in his teacher and he is able to follow his instructions to the fullest. The others who lack this level of faith are unable to follow the instructions perfectly. His teacher was an accomplished archer and his teacher was Arjuna's well wisher, so his faith was based on reason and not blind.

Further, when he heard that his brother Bhima was eating in the dark, he deduced that the relative positions of objects are constant irrespective of the amount of light. Bhima said that he knew where the food was and where his mouth was, and he could eat irrespective of whether it was bright or dark. Arjuna was inspired by this and started practicing archery in the dark. This was based on a third party experience on an unrelated activity, but Arjuna's right brain was able to have faith that if Bhima could eat in the dark, he could shoot targets in the dark. With due practice, he was able to develop the new skill of archery in the dark. This would have not been possible without the leap of faith that led him to try some thing new.

Chicken-egg problems and Dharamsankats

We are familiar with situations, such as "You can’t have chickens without eggs. And you can’t have eggs without chickens who grow up to be hens".

To better understand its metaphorical meaning, the question could be reformulated as: "Which came first, X that can't come without Y, or Y that can't come without X?" One real-world example in which the chicken-or-egg question helps identify the analytical problem is :A graduate cannot get a job because he has no experience, and cannot get experience because no one will give him a job.

Dharmasankat is a term in Indian religious and spiritual contexts implying a moral or ethical quandary, where choosing any of several options would result in a breach of one's dharma. In the Mahabharata, Arjuna was faced with a Dharamsankat when he had to choose between killing his relatives and allowing them to usurp all his rights and spend his life roaming around forests. How do we get around such Dharamsankats and Chicken-egg problems?

When we ask a question, such as 'what comes first, the chicken or the egg', our perception that one has to come first limits the possible answers to either the chicken or the egg. However there is no black and white answer to the question. Even more fundamental than the chicken or the egg is an entity that has the capability to create another entity similar to itself. This entity is present in both the chicken as well as the egg. When we view life's situations in black and white, we are perceiving them on a very superficial level. We really need to dig deeper beyond narrow views to transcend opposites and avoid being flummoxed by paradoxes.

Coming to the question of how to solve the Chicken egg problem. According the 2nd habit in Stephen Covey's book, all things are created twice - a first creation in the mind, and a second physical creation. Creating a world in which the Chicken egg problem does not exist is possible using the imagination, because there are no limitations to imagination. Or imagining a situation where the problem is solved already is possible. Although the solution may not be yet possible in the physical world, it is possible in the imaginary world. Once the first creation is complete, the second creation also eventually becomes possible.