<p>It is often in times of crisis that the mind, both individual and collective, turns to the issue of morality in governance. All ancient philosophies, the Greek, the Chinese and the Indian, spoke of morality as an integral part of governance. They maintained that the moral character of the individual was derived from, and shaped by, the rulers.</p>.<p>While fear and violence were regarded as a part of governance, Confucius, held an interesting view. He maintained that if a leader guided people by virtue they would not only reform themselves but also have shame. A hundred years of being ruled by the good would completely remove the need for violence or cruelty. The Greek statesman, Plato, believed that thought could be awakened only by tapping into the moral sense of a person.</p>.<p>Morality of governance has a prominent place in Indian mythology. One of the first questions that Yudhishsthira asked Bhishma, even as he was being persuaded to rejoice in his victory and accept the kingship, was: What is a king and why does one man stand over another? After the destruction caused by the war, for which he partly blamed himself, he wondered if he had the moral right to rule.</p>.<p>Bhishma replied that ideally, the Gods considered a mind which was highly refined and appreciated both law and profit, as a mind fit to rule. Having said so, he went on to assert how even such a mind had to restrain personal likes and dislikes, and do without hesitation what the law required. His acts as King had to be done putting aside desire, anger and greed. The ruler had to pledge to do Dharma, devotion to duty, and abnegation of the self.</p>.<p>Duryodhana got a lesson in the concept from his father. Dhritarashtra told him about the demon king Prahalada, who had conquered all of Indra's realms. Indira was puzzled and entered Prahalada's service to get an understanding. He pleased the master and Prahalada told him that success, as a rule, lay in never being resentful, never thinking of oneself as ruler, and always being eager to listen to advisors. Only then could he inspire them to advice. The ruler's anger and desire must both be under control. Indra understood, Duryodhana refused to.</p>
<p>It is often in times of crisis that the mind, both individual and collective, turns to the issue of morality in governance. All ancient philosophies, the Greek, the Chinese and the Indian, spoke of morality as an integral part of governance. They maintained that the moral character of the individual was derived from, and shaped by, the rulers.</p>.<p>While fear and violence were regarded as a part of governance, Confucius, held an interesting view. He maintained that if a leader guided people by virtue they would not only reform themselves but also have shame. A hundred years of being ruled by the good would completely remove the need for violence or cruelty. The Greek statesman, Plato, believed that thought could be awakened only by tapping into the moral sense of a person.</p>.<p>Morality of governance has a prominent place in Indian mythology. One of the first questions that Yudhishsthira asked Bhishma, even as he was being persuaded to rejoice in his victory and accept the kingship, was: What is a king and why does one man stand over another? After the destruction caused by the war, for which he partly blamed himself, he wondered if he had the moral right to rule.</p>.<p>Bhishma replied that ideally, the Gods considered a mind which was highly refined and appreciated both law and profit, as a mind fit to rule. Having said so, he went on to assert how even such a mind had to restrain personal likes and dislikes, and do without hesitation what the law required. His acts as King had to be done putting aside desire, anger and greed. The ruler had to pledge to do Dharma, devotion to duty, and abnegation of the self.</p>.<p>Duryodhana got a lesson in the concept from his father. Dhritarashtra told him about the demon king Prahalada, who had conquered all of Indra's realms. Indira was puzzled and entered Prahalada's service to get an understanding. He pleased the master and Prahalada told him that success, as a rule, lay in never being resentful, never thinking of oneself as ruler, and always being eager to listen to advisors. Only then could he inspire them to advice. The ruler's anger and desire must both be under control. Indra understood, Duryodhana refused to.</p>