Review - Play: Final Draft.

Saw the play last Sunday 9th Oct 2011 on recommendation from a friend. I
had read a few reviews and was quite intrigued by the story line. having
earlier seen another play - 'Love Birds' - by Girish Joshi, I was looking
forward to another satisfying experience.

But before I write anything more, let me sincerely compliment both the
actors. Performance wise these actors have surpassed the highest standards
benchmarked by giants like Dilip Prabhavalkar and Suhas Joshi. Every small
nuance and gesture is so full of impact and effect that one cannot but
appreciate their intelligence in unqualified superlatives. Kudos to the
Director for handling the script so efficiently and holding the audience
literally in a iron grip till the very end.

However, despite the synopsis giving a brief gist of the subject matter -
let me confess, I could not understand what finally is the message.
Dramatization of situations one after the other and carried out with full
justification of the anticipated and expected theatrics still does not
weave a whole which drives towards any focussed goal. The effort ends up as
a contrived and directionless excellence taking you nowhere.

I strongly suggest Mr Joshi's talent can work wonders and literally fire
the Marathi stage - provided he engages a script-writer of some repute and
produces a play which uses only his directorial talent.



Posted by Sanjeev Bhakay to Final Draft Comments & Feedback at 11/10/11
5:33 AM

104 YEAR YOUNG – Bank of Baroda :

Are we witnessing the Strategic Inflection Point ?

104 YEAR YOUNG – Bank of Baroda :

Are we witnessing the Strategic Inflection Point ?

Luckily I was a part of the festivities on the occasion of our 104^th Foundation Day celebrated with appropriate pomp and show at Baroda Corporate Centre, Mumbai. All branches, Regional Offices and Zones also marked the auspicious day with befitting events. A proud moment indeed, for all Barodians. It was being said that day that the upbeat mood witnessed in Bank of Baroda is not seen in other banks. Last few years have built up this feeling very steadily with improving business figures also aiding the process. Apart from the mood, visible changes taking shape in the Bank’s overall public image also merits a special mention. Certain path-breaking initiatives taken earlier viz. the branding exercise and the technological transformation deserve credit in no small measure. But the actual harnessing of resultant synergy started only during the last three years, as said.

In this context, I feel it is worthwhile to understand the famous concept viz. ‘Strategic Inflection Point’ as espoused by Andrew S Grove – CEO of Intel Corporation. In this write up, I intend to elaborate on this concept and thereafter draw parallels with our Bank. The exercise is aimed at analyzing forces which work on the fortunes of an organization and managerial responses which shape the growth trajectory upwards. But before I do that, allow me to quote a few facts concerning life-cycles of large corporates.

The average life expectancy of a multinational corporation-Fortune 500 or its equivalent-is between 40 and 50 years. This figure is based on most surveys of corporate births and deaths. A full one-third of the companies listed in the 1970 Fortune 500, for instance, had vanished by 1983-acquired, merged, or broken to pieces. Human beings have learned to survive, on aver-age, for 75 years or more, but there are very few companies that are that old and flourishing.

A depressing fact indeed. Add to this, the buzz during the initial days of computerization in India, predicted a gradual demise of ‘brick-and-mortar’ banking and eventually elimination of banking industry itself. Those were the formative years of the ubiquitous internet. It was said that banks would cease to be financial intermediaries and the web would replace them. Possibility of these eventualities actually taking shape has since receded. Branch banking continues to have a sway on financial affairs of even the most developed countries. In fact, the ‘human-touch’ seems to get a preference over tech-banking channels.

But that is digressing from the focus of this write-up.

Within the banking industry, we do see numerous players regularly vanishing. Even in the United Kingdom, during the worst phase of recession seen in 2007-08, many big names in banking succumbed or were nationalized. Even if we make allowances for the argument against demise of banking companies in the PSU space because of their state owned characteristic, it is an undisputed reality that generally the trajectory of growth is not a straight line going up on the right hand side. The graph more appropriately resembles a sinusoidal curve edging upwards on the X axis. It obviously implies that the organization is responding to environmental factors rather than being in control of the same. So far so good. But what happens when these environmental forces push the growth downwards so strongly as to literally blast the organization out of existence ? One such force was the feared impact of internet and its capabilities. That the threat never materialized was fortunate for the industry. Take a more real force – that of ballooning non-performing assets. Not very long ago, the overhang of NPAs spelt doom for the erstwhile ICICI Corporation. A bail out in the shape of reverse merger with its commercial banking arm saved the day for this behemoth. The threat was real and it did kill the Corporation. Andrew S Grove calls this as the 10X force.

Strategic Inflection Point – the theoretical position:

An inflection point, mathematically, is when the slope of a curve changes sign, for instance, from negative to positive. A point when the balance of forces shifts from the old structure, from the old ways of doing business and old ways of competing to the new. Before the strategic inflection point the bank simply was more like the old. After it, is more like the new. It is a point where the curve has subtly and profoundly changed, never to change back again.'

Unfortunately, from the inside, this is not evidenced as a pinpoint in time when everything changes, but rather a long period of extreme unrest. Corporate statements and operational actions are not aligned. Ideas about the right direction will split people on the same team. In a workplace that used to function collegially and constructively, wars will erupt. Chaos reigns.

Strategic dissonance is the divergence between actions and statements. This is one of the surest indications that a company is struggling with a strategic inflection point. The process of adapting to change starts with employees, who, through their daily work, adjust to new outside forces. So, while front line staff and middle managers are implementing and executing strategic actions that say one thing, senior management is issuing high level pronouncements that say the exact opposite.

Senior management is often hampered by the inertia of success. They got to where they are by being good at what they do. Over time, they have learned to lead with their strengths. So, not surprisingly, they continue to implement the same strategies and tactics that have worked for them during their careers.

At some point a vague outline of the new direction starts emerging. By this time, however, the company is dispirited, demoralized, or just plain tired. The leader now needs to form an image of what the company should look like when it gets to the other side: the essence of the company and the focus of its business. What the company will be and what it will NOT be. Redeploying resources as required (physical or human resources) to support the new direction is one option the leader exercises. Redeployment of his own time is also important, and has enormous symbolic value, communicating what is and is not important far more clearly than all the speeches he can give.

If the competition is chasing the company, the leader can only get out of the valley of death by outrunning the people who are after the company. And one can only outrun them if one commits oneself to a particular direction and runs as fast as one can. The leader should then communicate and clarify the direction as often as possible to the employees. Middle management is critical to help project the message over a distance. He therefore takes extra time with them to ensure their wholehearted commitment.

The other side of the valley of death represents a new industry order that was hard to visualize before the transition. Getting through the strategic inflection point requires enduring a period of confusion, experimentation, and chaos, followed by a period of single minded determination to pursue a new direction towards an initially nebulous goal. It is one of the most daunting tasks an organization has to endure. But when "10X" forces are upon us, the choice is taking on these changes, or accepting an inevitable decline, which is no choice at all.

Lastly, as structured, this section attempts to highlight parallels with the strategic inflection point as theorized by Andrew S Grove and situations prevailing in the external and internal environment of our Bank. Our Chairman & Managing Director’s vision and his ears-to-the-ground approach has seen us through the inflection point. I shall attempt to bring out the initiatives which are squarely attributable to him alone and which have launched the Bank on its way to the new paradigm.

By definition, a Strategic Inflection Point is that which prompts a fundamental change in business strategy. Nothing less is sufficient. Changes in the financial environment are so fast and far reaching that banks are required to be extremely nimble footed and adaptable. Though not exactly ‘Inflection Points,’ two significant factors became critical during the last two decades. First was the BASEL Accord with its rigorous prescriptions on Capital Adequacy, Asset Classification and Provisioning norms, which keep getting more and more stringent – as we all know. The second – more importantly, was the emergence of Information Technology and its forced adoption by banks for managing ever increasing business volumes. With a legacy of manual systems and outdated standards, a switch over to computerized systems was difficult. Aging workforce, resistance to change and large training gaps were impediments which had to be dealt with in double quick time. Opening up of our economy and entry of foreign banks has since emerged as a threat with immense potential to cause unprecedented upheavals in the industry. Regulatory oversight has deepened and there is pressure from the government for a more inclusive growth. This implies large scale branch expansion in unbanked rural areas, putting to test our resilience and capability to recruit and train thousands of new staff immediately. Reorienting senior staff to the emerging realities with motivational inputs is a challenge, given the immense cost and logistics involved. On the business front, a definite squeeze on interest margin, a stagnating CASA base, slack credit off-take by hesitant entrepreneurs and most importantly – the rising NPA levels are factors which combine to present the feared inflection point when fundamental changes are indicated for survival.

Our visionary leader Mr. M. D. Mallya, fortunately at the helm of affairs during this critical period responded by clearing all hurdles for 100% CBS not only in the Bank but also in the sponsored Regional Rural Banks and overseas territories. The fundamental strategic change initiated by our CMD was his decision to move decisively on several fronts simultaneously. The core banking system and enormous investments made for branding had to be used for reaching targeted business growth rates. A clean break from traditional practices and outmoded procedures had to be made, employees at levels were to be re-trained and re-oriented so as to equip them with desired skill-set. Employee morale had to be assiduously pumped up to harness full potential of the work force. Business levels were to grow at above industry average rates.

Mr. Mallya has introduced a systematic change under the ‘Navnirman’ project and established ‘Baroda NEXT’ branches with state-of-the-art technology and customer centric branch layout. Retail Loan Factories and SME Loan Factories with assembly-line processes were established for faster credit decisions and better quality of loan assets. A host of similar back office functions were hived off from branches to facilitate better customer service and better customer acquisition efforts by employees in the branches. Under the Business Process Reengineering (BPR) program, outmoded processes are being re-worked for ensuring enhanced customer focus. Senior staff and branch managers are being put through unique learning workshops viz. LEAP and Udaan etc. Promotion exercises are regularly conducted and a large number of employees realizing their aspirations. These efforts are just a few of his initiatives – but have the potential to impact the future with considerable force – enough to counter the 10X force of the environment. These initiatives have prevented bank’s trajectory from going down towards the old paradigm implying rejection of change and maintenance of status-quo. At the appropriate point in time, these measures have turned the trajectory up towards the new paradigm accepting change and adapting to change. The Inflection Point in Bank of Baroda has been spotted and adequately dealt with.

To recapitulate, ‘a strategic inflection point can be triggered by many things: intense competition, a change in regulations, or a minor change in technology. When a strategic inflection point occurs, the current ways of running your business no longer work. Yet, managed well, a strategic inflection point can be turned to your advantage and your business can emerge stronger than ever.’ Mr. Mallaya has shown how it has been done in our Bank. Let us all Barodians salute him for having steered the bank out of a morass with his sterling leadership qualities and keen foresight.

Don’t Worry…be Happy !

The things a person wants, and the things that will make that person happy, are hardly ever the same things. So much frustration and disappointment could be avoided if people could learn this simple principle, and adjust accordingly their overall strategy in the pursuit of happiness.

This essay seeks answers to the eternal questions which have plagued mankind since time immemorial. I do not profess to be a pundit on these matters. On the contrary I am what normally would best be described, as a coarse and earthy person. But that’s precisely the point. As a person completely devoid of finer sensibilities and given to hedonistic pursuits – I identify with many. Sorry about that, but lets face it – we are in general, material men and women. We take pleasure in accumulating worldly possessions and yearn for more endlessly. One satisfied want is replaced by another unfulfilled desire ad-infinitum.

Then there is this one-up-man ship which goads me towards incessantly wanting to be better than the neighbors and friends and relatives. If you have a Honda, I shall acquire a Bentley and if you have a Bentley, my aim would be to go for a Ferrari ! Does this sound familiar ?

I come back to my credentials justifying my writing about ‘happiness.’ I emphatically state that these are just the crass attributes, outlined above, which though incongruent with the content of my essay on this esoteric topic, provide me with a locus-standii which I now further elaborate. If a person like me can get to the core of the issue – it must be pretty easy to understand for all of us. Shorn of Vedic knowledge in matters of the soul and divinity, away from pursuits about the ‘self’ and divorced from spirituality as completely as I am, I represent the common man. I take this examination of happiness down to the grass-roots for readers to quickly assimilate. I don’t even have to make a conscious effort for that. My plebian bearing in these matters becomes my strength.

Before I really commence, I reproduce here, a forward received in my mailbox a few months ago. The writer, I am told, is Chetan Bhagat. It goes as follows:

“Don’t just have career or academic goals. Set goals to give you a balanced, successful life. I use the word balanced before successful. Balanced means ensuring your health, relationships, mental peace, in that order. There is no point of getting a promotion on the day of your breakup. There is no fun in driving a car if your back hurts. Shopping is not enjoyable if your mind is full of tensions. Life is one of those races in nursery school where you have to run with a marble in a spoon kept in your mouth. If the marble falls, there is no point coming first. Same is with life where health and relationships are the marble. Your striving is only worth it if there is harmony in your life.

Else, you may achieve the success, but this spark, this feeling of being excited and alive, will start to die. One thing about nurturing the spark – don’t take life seriously. Life is not meant to be taken seriously, as we are really temporary here. We are like a pre-paid card with limited validity. If we are lucky, we may last another 50 years. And 50 years is just 2,500 weekends. Do we really need to get so worked up? We are people, not programmed devices…!” “Don’t be serious, be sincere!”

This more or less sums up the issue quite roundly. But to pose the first question once again. What are our wants and what makes us happy ? Are the two the same ? Are things that we want same as those we need ? In a nut-shell, are wants and needs synonymous ? Let us examine these issues a bit more in detail.

A large apartment, computer and cellular phone may or may not qualify as a need depending on your particular circumstances while a designer suit, ice-cream, lottery tickets, entertainment center, club membership, concert tickets, trip to Singapore, necklace, and golf clubs all probably fall into the want section.

If you can take the time to start being honest with yourself, you will find that a lot of the things which you assumed were an absolute necessity until now are in reality nothing more than wants. Once you distinguish between the two and look at these issues objectively, you have placed yourself in the position to live within your means by simply asking yourself whether or not an item or service you are about to purchase - is a need or merely a want.

When you analyze the state of being ‘happy’ – whenever you last felt so, try to remember the attendant factors which were responsible for that feeling. You had perhaps brought a brand new car with latest features and with a price-tag which was equally impressive. You were certainly happy - and on the face of it, the reason was your latest acquisition. But after having parked it in your garage and after admiring its gleam, its styling and its stunning good looks, you might have sat in the driver’s seat, felt its controls, caressed its dash-board and literally loved it with a passion you were surprised you could have for inanimate objects. You then, perhaps, walked away from it very reluctantly giving it a loving glance over your shoulder. You kept telling yourself that your friends are going to be envious; your neighbours are going to be jealous and your relatives are going to swell with admiration….and so, I am happy.

Your sense of happiness started dropping drastically the very moment you actually drove it into the garage. You were unwilling to accept that. With some more passage of time, you were no longer happy – just a bit self-satisfied and smug. You started feeling the tension of impending car loan installment which becomes due in a few weeks. Your thought process led to a re-examination of items of expenditure on your house-hold budget. ‘Why do I need to continue with the costly club membership ? Why should my wife take those singing lessons ? And hey – is there a need for a gardener to look after the small patch of green in front of the house ? Most importantly, should we really go ahead with the pointless holiday at the obscure resort ?’

Now, step back and recollect the ‘happiness’ felt when these very decisions were taken not so long ago. Such is the nature of this fickle state of so-called ‘happiness.’ But compare the above scenario with fulfillment of ‘NEEDS.’ To buy a computer for carrying out our professional activities would obviously categorize the purchase as such. You continue to have a good feel about it every time some productive output is obtained from the machine. And although it does not give you the momentary peak of elation, the purchase certainly is a reason for a steady state of joy.

We, therefore, have to gradually shift focus on needs and avoid seeking pleasure in satisfying wants. That is part one of the discourse. The other important aspect is to not be obsessed with pleasure-seeking as it is momentary. Planning to be happy one day, we let so many small joys to go unnoticed. When I grow up and land a good job, I shall be happy. Let me get married now that I have a job and I will certainly be happy. My first child will bring happiness, let him get married and happiness will follow….

Countless small yet fulfilling moments of togetherness, of mirth and joy and of well-being have been lost without us being aware of them because we are waiting for the big-bang kind of happiness.

Lastly, the tendency to worry on inconsequential, uncertain and imagined happenings in future must be overcome. More often than not, the imagined catastrophe never occurs. But having worried over the likelihood of them happening deprives us of enjoying the present pleasant moments, which may never return. So we loose out on two counts. Summing up, let us reduce our wants to a manageable extent, be content with fulfilling our needs and stop worrying altogether !

Sanjeev Bhakay

Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam

I have realized, with some pain that the World is not going to follow the path of sanity and restraint. Albert Einstein once said, “I do not know with what kinds of weapons the Third World War will be fought, but the Fourth World War will be fought with sticks and stones.” This was said by the great scientist about 80 years ago and implied devastation so complete as to necessitate a start of civilization from scratch after the third world war. Obviously, he was concerned at the mindless proliferation of nuclear war-heads. The world was then divided into the Western world and the Soviet block and the ill-famed ‘cold-war’ was at its peak. Since then, the nuclear arms race has seen many new players emerge regularly, with nuclear weapons capability having 1000 times more megatons than the Hiroshima / Nagasaki bombs.

Small local issues which have the potential to escalate into a full-fledged war are festering across the globe. Any one issue can ignite the tinder-box of doom. Einstein will therefore be proved wrong as it is likely that there will be no fourth world-war at all. Mankind may not survive the massive annihilation which will be unleashed from these bombs in the third war itself.

This incidentally, is not an attempt at pontificating on the ills of war and violence. I am well aware of the immediate instinctive reaction of readers to switch off and read something else, at the slightest hint of a tedious sermon on this topic. I am also aware of the volumes written on this subject by eminent personalities in politics, social work and religion. In comparison, I am a distinct nobody. To re-emphasize, I am not going to preach non-violence - a topic which has been chewed upon and regurgitated endlessly.

So what is the purpose of the present effort?

Let us view it from another perspective. We have many well read, intelligent and articulate people amongst us who openly advocate a stronger and dominating role for United States of America in geo-politics. They seem to suggest that the President of USA should be a feared man – who should not talk of peace. Heaping unbridled criticism on his office, they justify their view point by saying that unless Mr. Barak Obama adopts a stance akin to the classic Wild West cowboy, guns blazing from a hip-draw, stubble growth on his chin and the characteristic red bandana fluttering in the wind, the upstarts of the planet will not learn to keep in line.

Why does USA not carpet bomb a few inconvenient rouge states out of existence? What prevents the President to ‘teach them a lesson’ and eliminate the scourge of terrorism afflicting the world? It is his soft and spineless stand which has emboldened these nation-states into belligerence threatening to challenge the authority of this world policeman – they aver.

Whether there is merit in this averment or not is beside the point. Similar expectation may well have been from any other powerful nation’s president or prime minister. And now I come to my focus: What are we trying to achieve by this rabid diatribe? Are we not overlooking the obvious self-destruct that this argument guarantees?

My main argument is, whether we really need to have a dominating world-power which would seek to enforce ‘discipline’ as per its (subjective) considerations? Is USA the only repository of wisdom, blessed with divine authority for carrying out its writ in the world community? What is wrong with China as an alternative? Or, Russia for that matter? The present incumbent in the oval office is perhaps making genuine efforts at reconciling divergent interests and talks of peace from a position of strength. Advocating peace does not necessarily mean bowing to terrorist’s agenda or of cowardice. On the contrary, it means that the US is willing to let bygones be bygones and looks forward to an era of mutual trust, co-existence and yes, Peace! A courageous stand I would say.

Polarization in the world, whether between two opposing forms of government or between two religions, prepares the theatre for head-on confrontation. If we look at the planet Earth as a spaceship with finite resources for its crew, the rate at which we are consuming the same is sure to deplete its stocks sooner than later. Locking up valuable resources in Bombs and armaments only accelerates this process.

In a reputed science magazine viz. ‘Science Today,’ I remember having read long time ago, that the entire world’s energy requirement can be met by putting into geo-stationary orbits, a few solar batteries, which can catch the Sun’s heat and beam it back to terrestrial receivers as electricity. The project was then estimated to cost an amount equivalent to the defense budgets of all nations. Add to this a benefit that it would be absolutely non-polluting. But as with other similar ideas which have been tested in prototypes – the world has ignored it.

What is stressed here is not the environmental issue and neither the short-term greed of vested interests – exemplified by a similar unconcern towards encouraging alternate fuels for powering automobiles. It is a matter of record that technology exists today for making use of water to run a car but is not allowed to replace the petrol driven internal combustion engines. Massive investments in Automobile factories all over the world will become redundant which politicians and owners of these factories do not wish to jeopardize. I wish, on the contrary, to stress on the imperative of completely forgetting the Nation concept and think of the world as one single community. If Europe has been able to unify – to some extent at least – what prevents the rest of the world from following this example?

A World Government, a Common law and Equitable resource sharing – are these ideals only utopian? Our intelligence is capable of handling the logistics when it is free from negatives like espionage, war and subterfuge. Let us give it a try, we have everything to loose otherwise. That is my belief.

Sanjeev Bhakay

Reincarnation and the paradox of suffering of the pious

The traditional definition of 'God' is a perfect being that designed and created the universe. I won't go into an analysis of the nebulous word 'perfect' here, but in general it seems most people take this to include attributes such as omnipotence (unlimited power), omniscience (unlimited knowledge.) and benevolence (kindness, compassion, lacking ill-will or malevolence). These three attributes (along with that of being a creator, designer or first-cause-by-choice of the universe) are firmly ingrained into the meaning most religious believers give their God, and if one or more of these attributes should fall, I think it would require some rethinking on the part of the believer about the nature of the being they often heap so much praise upon.

The Problem of Suffering is one that has been around a long time, and in my opinion one of the most powerful reasons why it seems extremely unlikely a deity, as described above, exists. It hinges on a sort of disproof by contradiction, so to speak. If it can be shown that the three characteristics listed above (along with that of being the creator/designer) are incompatible and cannot logically exist in the same being, then that demonstrates that, logically at least, such a being is impossible, cannot exist. I should add here, however, that I do not take this argument as an absolute proof, per se, but instead as at the very least a good reason not to give much consideration to the possibility of existence of such a deity.

The idea behind the Problem of Suffering is fairly simple. Any one of us can look around and see the existence of pain and suffering in the world. We see people spending years slowly dying in hospital beds from terrible cancers; we see children abused, raped and killed by the adults who hold power over them; we see cities destroyed, families crippled, innocents dead from not only war, but unavoidable natural disasters as well; we see a world where age brings with it a terrible decay, mentally and physically, cured only by death itself. Suffering is all around us, that much is undeniable. And I think we all have some sort of natural aversion to it. If we can minimize our suffering, we tend to. That's not to say that suffering can't be a learning experience - but at some point in the extent to which people suffer, I think most people would draw a line. How much can a child of two learn from a torturous death by cancer? And so I think most of us do desire suffering to be, if not abolished or minimized, at least reduced from what we can so easily observe around us every day of our lives.

How then, can a world so full of unnecessary suffering exist, if it was created by a deity of not only unlimited power and knowledge, but benevolence as well? Even our limited human understanding can conceive of a logically possible world where there is less suffering. Why then, would not the god in question create such a world instead of the one it did? Perhaps it lacked the power to create a better world - in this case it is certainly not omnipotent, by the usual understanding of the word. Perhaps it lacked the foresight and knowledge to understand what it was creating, or to see how to create a better universe - in this case it is certainly not omniscient, by the usual understanding of the word. If it had both the power and the knowledge to create a better world, and did not do so, then its choice seems a malevolent one; not something a compassionate being would choose. So given the suffering that most certainly exists in our world, an omnipotent, omniscience and benevolent deity seems an absurdity. No such deity can exist - it would have to give up its claim to at least one of those attributes.

One common objection to the Problem of Suffering is the widespread claim that evil is necessary for good - that suffering is necessary for happiness. This is an opinion often shared by believers and non-believers alike, and it basically states that if we never experienced any suffering, we would have nothing against which to gauge our happiness - we would exist in a single static state which we could not truly enjoy without knowing what another state is like. The argument has some intuitive appeal to it, but that alone does not establish it. After all, contrary to intuition, cold is not the opposite of heat, but the lack of it - there is in fact no 'opposite' of heat, and no such opposite is needed for heat to be a meaningful concept. It seems at least somewhat plausible then that an analogy could be made between heat and happiness. If we lived in a world where there were merely degrees of happiness, but no suffering, happiness could still remain a meaningful thing. Of course, one might define suffering as the lack or relative lack of happiness. Even in this case, however, I think most of us can imagine happiness still existing meaningfully in a universe where there is less of even this type of suffering (in other words, where no one is so lacking in happiness as to have a terrible cancer or be killed by a natural disaster); thus again the universe could have been created with less suffering without destroying happiness. Happiness could still be balanced by suffering in a universe where innocent children (who lack even basic understanding of the situation) don't die slow deaths from disease.

Given the ideas presented above, it seems to me not unreasonable to conclude that the omnipotent, omniscient and benevolent creator deity is a contradiction, and thus not logically possible. Because there is so much unnecessary suffering in the world, it seems that if any omnipotent and omniscient being created the world, that being could not have been benevolent as well. If benevolent, it seems it must have lacked one of the other attributes. There is one objection to the Problem of Suffering which I have not yet covered and that is that a being of such power and knowledge would be so far beyond our limited human understanding that we cannot come to any sure conclusions about its nature, its choices, the possibilities involved, and so forth. This is indeed a valid objection, and certainly one of the reasons I do not categorically claim that no such god exists (it could, for example, 'transcend' logic itself, and contradiction would thus present no problem to its existence). However, all the evidence we do have, all that is at our disposal as beings of limited understanding, points towards a universe where such a being is not possible, does not exist. While the possibility for error is certainly there, I see no reason to give it any more thought than other seemingly-contradictory possibilities which we pragmatically rule out every day - that the sun will simply disappear from existence tomorrow, or that the universe is actually the mixed droppings of a pair of transcendent invisible pink unicorns, or that the universe was simply created by an omnipotent, omniscient evil deity !!!

They, and literally anything else (!), may in fact be the case, given the fallible understanding we humans have, but that doesn't give us any reason not to rule them out as far as living our lives goes. The existence of something that is so far beyond us is indistinguishable from that thing simply not existing.

This seemingly irreconcilable paradox received the attention of Hindu philosophers and resulted in the fundamental difference Hindu religious belief has with other religions. The baffling quiz facing western thinkers since Biblical times has been addressed quite succinctly by Hinduism. The key to all such paradoxical dead-ends comes in the form of the theory of reincarnation. That the soul travels through endless cycles of birth-death-rebirth and eventually refines itself by Karma to a state where its purity pushes it into the waiting arms of the Almighty is a solution to the vexing issue. Earning divine retribution for bad deeds and succour from pain for the good deeds, the journey of the soul seasons it to the right state. Thus, a child in pain is seen as divine justice for the soul which erred unforgivably in one of its previous births !

Sanjeev Bhakay