This chapter explores the correlation between variables such as “atma sanyam” (self restraint), “vivek” (wisdom), and “vikas” (development) of a country. It proves that spirituality, inner self development, increases work performance, thereby increasing the “development,” where the development of the inner self is the output of “sanyam” and “vivek.” If an individual has the input of “sanyam” and “vivek,” then his innerself is developed, and if he is performing every activity meaningfully, then his nation has the ensured progress that is S+W = D. The other equation, S=W=D, automatically gets its shape as “sanyam” leads to “vivek.” “Vivek” leads to development, meaning S=W=D. Thus, the authors assert that “sanyam” is the best input and independent variable that affects “vivek” and “development.”
TopIntroduction
Economics and Public Administration both provide a serious concern for a country’s development. In the present consumerist society, Economics and Public Administration should be used in a coordinated manner so that it contributes to the physical as well mental growth of an individual. A physically and mentally fit individual’s capacity should be used to the utmost for the development of the country. In the present paper, we are seeking a correlation between the variables such as ‘atma sanyam’ (self restrain), vivek (wisdom) and the holistic development” of a country. We take the individual’s development indicators in the form of ‘vivek’ for the entire countries’ development because lately the miseries, unhappiness, and increasing discontentment have reached to the alarming heights. By ‘vivek’ we mean wisdom not ‘intellect’. ‘Intellect’ is ‘Buddhi’ which seeks self pleasure but ‘wisdom’, is vivek which seeks inner self contentment in the welfare of all. Thus this is an effort to test our hypothesis. The selected variables are considered as essential parameters that in fact are responsible for the development. At this point development should not be mistaken with growth. Growth and development are similar words but different from each other, growth is the quantitative aspect of development whereas development is quantitative as well as qualitative. According to the current prevailing wisdom, development is synonymous with economic growth and is best promoted by privatizing public and community assets, deregulating markets, removing barriers to the free flow of trade and investment among nations and privatizing knowledge by guaranteeing the protection of intellectual property rights.
Roughly during the forty years (1950 to 1990) period, in which economic output expanded by five times the worlds’ population have doubled. With the increase in population the number of people living in absolute poverty and the gap between rich and poor both doubled. Ecological devastation reached such proportions that it placed the future viability of the human species in doubt in nearly every country of the world. The growth as currently defined is not itself a panacea for what ails human society. Indeed it is a major contribution to many of those ills. Yet growth dominates public policy almost to the exclusion of other values (NGO coalition, IRED Asia and the PCD forum). The breakthrough in our own thinking about the theory problem came when we realized that what we are looking for was not an alternative theory of development, which almost inevitably buys into many of the assumptions of the prevailing growth model. The alternative we sought was theory of sustainability which begins from a wholly different set of premises. Our theory of sustainability draws its premises from the critics of the two failed dominant system of economic thought and practice, insights from Asia’s rich cultural and spiritual heritage and the wisdom of indigenous people. The emergent theory, which we outlined, takes the holistic view of human needs that embraces the social, spiritual, intellectual and cultural dimensions of the human experience. It at once identifies the roots of the ecological crisis and helps us to predict the conditions under which the natural dynamics of human social processes are most likely to work towards, rather than away from a balanced relationship between human society and the planets ecology.
In spite of its religious inheritance and practice India has been rated as one of the most corrupt country in the world, among seventy five rated by transparency international. This means that religious teachings and practices have no effect on ethics and morals of the citizen. At the other hand a few western countries, their religion is only nominal and there are no religious connotation to work and life, there is practically no corruption or nepotism. This shows that it is possible to have a reasonable amount of ethical and moral conduct without depending on religion. The western countries have been able to enforce course of conduct by their management practices where they make the people accountable for what they do. India has not been able to enforce rules and regulations and civic consciousness.