 During Rama's time, it was that time trying to establish a civilization. Sending his pregnant wife to the forest is a cruel thing. He lived with that pain every moment of his life. So, in Krishna's case, he deals with them completely differently, not by the book, but by his wit. In the war, he was very cunning. So, he is dealing with him in a different way. Namaskaram, Sadhguru! Lord Ram and Lord Krishna were very different in their leadership styles. In my understanding, Ram would follow the books, whereas Krishna would not worry about the beans if the end hole was right. Sadhguru, whose principles should a modern-day CEO emulate, Ram or Krishna? Well, I understand the basis of that question. Should I play by the rule book or should I play by my conscience or consciousness? Well, it depends on what kind of situations and what kind of roles you have to play. See, at the time of Rama, you know, we call him Rama in southern India, okay? You cut off his name, Ram. In Tamil Nadu is Raman, okay? So, when it comes to Rama, he is playing by the book, because you must understand at that time, one continuous conversation in that society is how to establish an order. So, Rama is at that kind of time. When in this subcontinent, there was no described law. So, one important dimension of his life was he wanted to bring order and civilization to that place. So, he always talked about the thing. Even if he saw it was very cruel what he was doing, for example, sending his wife back to forest the second time over, when she is pregnant, he knows it's wrong. He knows as a husband it's wrong, as a man it's wrong. But he is doing it because if I don't establish the law, who else will? If the king doesn't establish the law, all others will start doing their own things according to personal likes and dislikes. So, this is on one level a hugely admirable thing that you are willing to make very severe personal sacrifices for being a ideal administrator or to be seen as an ideal king by everybody, because you want to be an inspiration to be emulated by the rest of the citizenry because you're just trying to establish a civilization, not really totally civilized. You're trying to establish the laws. It is like the wild west, not exactly in those terms, but law is ambiguous. So, he is trying to make it very clear this is the way to conduct your life. By the time Krishna came, civilization was established. Well-established kingdoms were there, clear-cut rules of life, business and warfare, everything was there. But just a handful of people were taking the law into their hands, twisting it as they want and doing what they want. Because, see it is like when the law is not there, you have to treat it in one way. When the law is there and everybody knows what is the law but they're finding an underhand way of doing things, now you have to treat it as a crime. So, how you treat crime and how you treat an outlaw, I'm trying to make a difference. There is not much difference, but I'm trying to make a difference because somebody is out of the law because he has no sense of law in his head. Somebody is a criminal, he knows what's the law and he's subverting it intentionally, all right? Not because of the compulsions of the situation alone, but he's by choice subverting the law. So in Krishna's case, the people that he is handling, the do-do-do brothers, you know, hundred dos, Duryodhana and Ko, here these are people know who exactly know what is the law of the time, but they are intentionally subverting it. So he deals with them completely differently, not by the book, but by his wit, by his, you know, cunning also, many times in the war, he was very cunning. Because he knows these people, if you go by the law and let them win, they're not going to give a just rule to anybody. They will do anyway what they want to do, all right? They'll anyway do what they want to do, they will not go in a just manner for the people. So he's dealing with them in a different way. So these are two different contexts, these are two different times. So there, what we need to see is, for their time, they're acting in a relevant way, both of them. Similarly, for our time, we must act in a relevant way. Now law is hundred percent clear. You cannot be an outlaw, you cannot say, I don't understand. Right now still, you know, like when we were growing up, this is a big thing around the world. This is the time of Fidel Castro and Che Guevara and all this. We are all thinking revolution, revolution. In India, all this Charu Majumdar, Kano Sanyal and you know, all these people, Somaloo in the south, we are all super inspired by them and we want to go into armed conflicts. Well, it took some time for me to come to my senses, but otherwise I was almost there. Okay, some of my friends went. I went till there, but then I found that organization was as corrupt as anything else as the government is. So I stepped back. Why I'm telling this to you is, that was a time when I'm saying in 60s, 70s, we are still thinking, this nation is not fully formed. But now this nation is fully formed. All our business should be is to establish the constitution in everybody's minds and hearts. It's very important because that is where the largest well-being is. If I write my own constitution and you write your own constitution, nobody is going to be well in this place. If we, if we want to address the largest well-being of this nation, largest number of people in this nation, then we must go by a single law, single rule book. It's very important. Not even as Rama went because Rama went in a, by the word, not being just many times, just by the word being extremely cruel to certain people because he's trying to establish the law. But now that is well done. Now we can look at justice in a completely more humanistic way. We can use the rule book as a guideline. That's what we're doing today in many ways. A few people have not come into the fold, unfortunately, but otherwise the largest population in the country is looking at the rule book as a guideline and apply the law in a humanistic manner. That is the idea of a rule book. Rule book is not a gullet in to cut people's heads, all right? But at one stage it is so. When in Wild West they tried to establish law, how they established law was these judges were called hanging judges. That doesn't mean they were hanging. For anything they were hanging, people, just about anything. Daily hangings in small towns, in a town of a few hundred population, every day hanging, all right? Every day at least one guy will be hung. So hanging, hanging, hanging, they kind of established the law. Unfortunate, this happens to a country or a civilization. When you're trying to establish a national, national identity or a civilizational identity in a very short span of time, when it happens over a long span of time, it can happen with much less cruelty. But when it tries to happen in a very short, brief amount of time, enormous cruelty will happen. This is what people call as revolutions. This is what people call as establishment of law, whatever. But when they try to do it in a short span of time, wherever you see in the world, whether it's United States or China or Russia, wherever, when they tried to create a whole new civilization in a brief amount of time, it could only happen with enormous cruelty. So during Rama's time, it was that time trying to establish a civilization. But not in such a rush as it's been done in modern times, they took time. So there was no that level of cruelty, but there was cruelty. Sending his pregnant wife to the forest is a cruel thing. Very cruel thing for himself. It's not just cruel to his wife and his children. It's extremely cruel to him. With that pain, he lived all his life. He was not somebody, he sent his wife away and he's happy. He lived with that pain every moment of his life. But he still did it because for him establishing a rule book was very important. But Krishna's time is a different time. Our time is totally different time. So we must be current. We must be relevant to the times in which we exist.