Tradition of Non-violence and Peace in India

JAIN VISHVA BHARATI UNIVERSITY

The nature of man is such as to urge him to participate in the fullness of life, to be receptive of the significant and to lie open to whatever has meaning and value. Fortunately, our country has a cultural heritage which is at least five thousands years old and quite a few of its elements have been widely appreciated and acclaimed. There is a common belief, that Indian tradition is out and out spiritual in nature. And, the history of India would remain enigmatic, particularly, the remarkable phenomenon of the continuity of Indian culture through the millennia would remain a mystery, if we do not take into account the role that spirituality has played not only in determining the direction of her philosophical and cultural effort but also in replenishing the springs of creativity at every crucial hour in the long and often many journey. It is true that spirituality has played a role in every civilization and that no culture can claim a monopoly for spirituality. And yet, it can safely be affirmed that the uniqueness and continuity of Indian culture can be traced to her unparalleled experimentation, discovery and achievement in the vast field of spirituality. Indian culture has recognized spirituality not only as the supreme occupation of man but also as his all-integrating occupation. Ancient visionary seers and saints have expounded ages ago the universal and eternal values like non-violence, truth, non-stealing, chastity, non-possession, love, compassion, purity, simplicity etc. playing a role of beacon in the midst of darkness and helps one to perform his worldly duties in harmony and attain the highest goal prescribed for human being.

Out of these the first five one are the basic of the foundation of morality and value realization and, in fact, are more relevant to the present times. The principle of non-violence is existent all over in Indian scriptures It has been stressed by religious exponents, social reformers and political leaders, and above all it has been accepted as important from the point of view of one's ownself. Thus, it is religiously, ethically, socially, politically and psychologically important and necessary.

There are certain peaks of development of the concept of non-violence, and can be traced from the Vedic times down to the times of Buddha, Mahavira, Gandhi, Tulsi and Mahaprajna and its extreme can be noticed in Jain Tradition.

The principle of non-violence or 'ahimsa' is the first among the five vows of Vedic, Buddhism and Jainism. The term 'ahimsa' is the most popular among all. It is closely associated with the very human psychological make up. The instinct of love, sympathy or 'karuna' furnishes the basis of 'ahimsa'. The universality of it is seen in the fact that there is not a single person in the world in whom the whole mental constitution is filled not with love or non-violence but only with the opposite of love, i.e. hatred or in other words 'himsa' or violence. One does at the same time behold that the opposite of love, i.e. hatred, 'himsa' or violence, constitutes the other aspect of human personality. In life, in general there exists a relationship between 'himsa' and 'ahimsa'. But a good life or moral life would indicate the side of 'ahimsa', i.e. of love; sympathy or 'karuna' is more important than the side of 'himsa', i.e. of hatred and violence. Ahimsa is essential for an individual as a member of a family, as a member of the society, as a member of a nation and as a member of the whole universe.

The term 'ahimsa' has its origin in 'himsa'; 'hisi' is its root, which means killing or destroying or hurting a living being. And the opposite of it is 'ahimsa' i.e. non-killing, non-destroying or non-injury. Since 'ahimsa' is a negative term it may be taken literally as purely negative in character, that is only what 'himsa' is not; and it can be inferred from this that 'ahimsa' simply means non-killing, non-injury or non-destruction of living beings, and the positive side of it by way of protecting a living being, helping a living being and loving a living being is not connected with the moral principle of 'ahimsa', and therefore it has no value in itself. But this should be borne in mind that this positive aspect of 'ahimsa' by way of loving each other, helping each other or sympathizing with others, is an indispensable aspect of 'ahimsa'. It is only in this sense that it is an indicator of the active life the individual. Activity is the essential factor of all individuals, or of all the souls in bondage; no soul in bondage can live without activity. Absence of activity for such individual means life-lessness. The passive state and the very pursuit of morality cannot go together. This passive state is indicated by the purely negative aspect of 'ahimsa'. Only don't without do's cannot give a complete explanation; thus the meaning of ahimsa should not be understood in the verbal sense only. In its real sense it is both positive and negative. "Ahimsa is non-hate or absence of hatred that is in positive sense sympathy or love". Absence of hatred promotes love, which is the source of unification of different individuals. "Further it is a fact of common experience that hatred retards the common development of both the mind and the body of the individual, while love makes them bloom forth in their natural splendour in the lover." And to this culture of hatred there is no antidote except the practice of love. According to Bosanquet, "In the purity of love and will with the supreme good you are not only saved, but you are free and strong." Viewed in this light of the practice of non-violence should and would become a working principle of life.

Therefore, ahimsa is incomplete without the positive counterpart based on love, though its negative aspect is equally significant from many standpoints with this basic concept of non-violence, both as positive and negative, it will be a systematic attempt to trace out its development from Vedic times down to the time of Buddha and Mahavira, where the concept is found to be most flourishing. One is not however properly equipped to have a scientific approach to pre-vedic period, so it is difficult to deal with that period and to trace out the origin or root of this principle during that period.

Vedas

It is not proper to say that 'non-violence' exists in Veda in the form it exists in the Upanisadic and Sramanical systems. It is neither given the place of the highest moral principle nor is its field of application so wide as is found in later times. But it cannot at the same time be assumed that even in an implicit form this moral principle nor is its field of application so wide as is found in later times. But it cannot at the same time be assumed that even in an implicit form this moral principle does not exist. In the Rgveda morality as such is only a family and social matter. "Truth, right conduct, kindliness, loyalty to one's neighbour and comrade … were counted as high virtues. Fraud, malignant speech, lying, violence to defenceless, and adultery were regarded as grave crimes." But supremacy of the yajnas (religious rituals) is the theme of Rgveda; yajna was performed to please the gods in order to fulfil the material needs which can be categorized only in the efforts for social welfare. The highest duty of men was towards the gods which was fulfilled only by the performance of yajnas. But there is also a proclamation for their duties towards men; "kindness to all is enjoined; hospitality is reckoned a great virtue." Herein one can detect the germ of the positive aspect of ahimsa, i.e. compassion or love. But, it is to be said that no proper promulgation of love or compassion for lower creations is found in the Vedas.

Brahmanas

The age of the Brahmanas cannot be very distinctively differentiated from the age of the Vedas in most of its features. The Brahmanas give a detailed account of the sacrificial rites. The chief of these Brahmanas are Satapatha and Aitareya. Though the emphasis was laid on sacrifice as is done in the Vedas, yet one of the most salient features of the Brahmanas is high moral sense and exalted sentiment. And they discuss the duties of men towards men very emphatically. Side by side with its insistence on outer there was also emphasis on inner purity, truth, godliness, honour of parents, kindness to animals, love of man, abstinence from theft, murder and adultery were inculcated as the essentials of good life. All this 'kindness to animals', 'love of men', abstinence from murder, indicate the very same concept of ahimsa.

Upanisads

In the Upanisads the term 'ahimsa' as such is found to have occurred. It first finds expression in a mystical passage in Chandogya Upanisad, where the five ethical qualities, one being ahimsa, are said to be equivalent to a part of the yajna in which the whole life of man is made an epitome. According to this Upanisad, Krishna was the disciple of Ghora Angirasa. And Ghora Angirasa was the person who taught Krishna of 'atman-yajna'. And this self-sacrifice (atman-yajna) does not need gifts to be given to the purohitas, for non-violence, asceticism, liberality, truth, uprightness, etc., are the gifts for this yajna. According to Prof. Kosambi Ghora Angirasa was the twenty second Tirthankara of Jainas called Aristhanemi, who was followed by Parsvanatha.

Thus, it is clear that the Upanisads leave aside many of the rituals and ceremonies of the Vedic and Brahmanic times, they point out not only the outward consistency but also the inwardness of morality and stress the importance of motive in conduct and inner purity. So far as the positive aspect is concerned, 'in the Upanisads we are asked to root out our pride, resentment and lust etc. and not the tender feelings of love, compassion and sympathy.' However, the Upanisads have gone even further by recommending love to the brute creations of the world. In Brahadaranyaka Upanisad three cardinal virtues have been enumerated.  Self-control, charity and compassion were the cardinal virtues for different types of people. This thus reveals that compassion is considered a significant virtue. Taittiriya Upanisad also points out certain virtues, which include compassion and non-violence.

Samriti

Manu, the first lawgiver of Hindu society, has clearly and specifically stated the duties of a man, as to how he should behave. He has named these duties 'sāmāsika dharma' the duties of man, in brief; these duties have been explicitly stated as five among which ahiṁsā tops the list. At other place it is said, "He who gives no creature willingly the pain of confinement or death, but seeks the good of all, enjoys, bliss without end. Flesh cannot be obtained without injury heaven. Therefore, one should avoid the flesh. He who during a hundred years annually performs the horse-sacrifice yajna and he who entirely abstains from flesh, enjoys for their virtue an equal reward."

Mahābhārata also emphasize non-violence as the greatest of all virtues. According to it non-violence means abstention from violence not only through body but also through mind speech. Mental violence should at the outset be abjured.

Patanjala Yoga

After a brief sketch of the development and origin of ahimsa from the Vedic period to the epic period, the most developed state of ahiṁsā in recent Hinduism can be traced out in the Pātañjala yoga-sutras. As has already been seen, Patañjali's period is much later than that of Buddha or Mahāvira, his time is supposed to be 4th or 5th century of our era, it cannot therefore be supposed that he remained uninfluenced by the Buddhist and the Jaina thought. The doctrine of 'ahiṁsā, as the first yama (vow) has a close affinity to the Buddhist and the Jaina conception of ahiṁsā. The ambiguous status occupied by this principle in Smrtis, Epics and the other Brāhmanical sources is made clear and distinct in Patañjali. For Patañjali ahiṁsā is not subor dinate to anything or even yajñas, but everything else is subordinate to ahiṁsā. Ahiṁsā not only means non-injury to all living beings, but also means abstinence from malice towards them in everyway and at all times. And all other abstentions and observances are rooted in it. Patañjali calls this abstinence the 'mahāvrata'. The term 'mahavrata' also occurs in the Jaina system and is used for the complete vow of the monks and the nuns. Patañjali also uses it in a somewhat similar sense of unconditional and universally applicable vow of the yogin, which is complete in the sense that it is unqualified by species, place, time or urgent necessity, i.e. it makes no room for any exception to commit any act of violence under any circumstance. We can see that the slaughter of animals for the yajña or for any other purpose is condemned as in the Sramanical systems.

Patañjali also tries to classify violence into various types. According to him ahiṁsā (violence) is not only physically injuring someone, even asking someone to commit an act of hiṁsā and to approve or appreciate such an act committed by some one is also regarded as hiṁsā. In this way fundamentally hiṁsā is of three types, kṛta and anumodita, i.e. doing oneself, making someone else to do, and appreciating one who has done it. Now each of these three types of ahiṁsā can be further divided into three sub-types on the basis of the motive of hiṁsā whether it is greed, anger or infatuation. Even, each of these, (greed, anger, and infatuation) is of three types, according to their intensity, i.e. mild, moderate and vehement; thus hiṁsā can be of twenty seven varieties in all. Yet again, each of these twenty seven varieties is sub-divided as gentle, moderate and extreme. These are thus gently mild, moderately mild and extremely mild. Similarly, gently moderate, moderately moderate, and keenly moderate; likewise, gently keen, moderately keen and vehemently keen. All this, undoubtedly, shows the importance given by Patañjali to the principle of non-violence which is unique in the history of the so-called Vedic systems.

Non-violence and Peace in Jainism

Chronologically, ahiṁsā in Jainism should have been discussed before the yoga system of Patañjali. But, since Yoga system has been included in vedic Tradition. It is thought worthwhile to trace out the fuller development of Hinduism, from the highest ideal of yajna to the ideal of non-violence, from concrete ritualism to the abstract principles of morality.

The cult of non-violence has taken quite a new turn in Jainism. Ahiṁsā in its extreme form can be noticed in Jainism, the entire Jaina religious and philosophical system is founded on ahiṁsā. Naturally, in Jaina literature and scriptures at various places the glory of this principle is sung and the opposite of it is condemned. The essence of knowledge, it is said, lies in non-killing which is the supreme principle said by the omniscient.

The underlying principle of non-violence is the principle of equlity or 'samata, as has been pointed out, 'samatā' is the basis of all morality, philosophy and logic of Jaina thought and prevails all over Jaina system. For this it is said, "No living being loves suffering (dukkha) just as I donot," thinking thus, one who does not indulge in violence, nor does let others indulge in it, is a true monk (samana) or one who established himself in samatā. It is further stressed that all living beings, great or small, want to live, none wants to die; therefore the nirgranthas (monks) totally abstain from violence. The Jaina view of samatā is that no one is inferior or superior, everybody has the potentiality to develop himself and can achieve the highest goal. One's behaviour should be such that it does not retard the development of or injure the physical, mental, or intellectual vitality of others. This is depicted in the daily prayer recited by the monks and householders, 'I have friendship with all and enmity with none. Understood in this broad sense, the principle of 'samatā' or ahiṁsā solves all of the Jaina metaphysical, epistemological and ethical problems.

In Jaina scriptures, as has been seen, life of the individual as such is most respected, and equal favour is given to all. In the field of social ethics first of all a sympathetic attitude for all men in general is seen, the so-called caste system did not convince Mahāvira or his predecessor Pārvanātha. They did not like that one class should dominate the other. Even in the order of Mahāvira, there were monks from the so-called sudra (lourer place in social hierarchy) and they were given the same honour and regard as was given to those from the so-called higher castes. This at the outset is the application of equality or samatā to general behaviour of man towards man. In the intellectual or the philosophical field too, Jainism propounds the theory of Anekant (non absolutistic out look), which means that every judgement is relative. This theory, in brief, expresses the view that every judgement reveals only one aspect of reality, and therefore every judgement is relative and subject to certain conditions. It is because one forgets this limitation and regards his own judgements as unconditionally true, that he indulges in a number of quarrels and disagreements and thus hurts the feelings of those who have a different view of reality. Reality as depicted in 'anekantavada' has manifold aspects and all the aspects of reality are not revealed to imperfect beings. So most of the judgments regarding reality given by various thinkers and systems of thought are limited and conditional, and, therefore, are only partial explanations of reality. This sympathetic attitude in intellectual field is rightly understood by the intellectual as intellectual non-violence.

Another important field of philosophy to which Jainas have applied the principle of non-violence is the field of personal effort in the spiritual life of the person. This expresses itself in the theory of karman (Doctrine of Karma). This may at first appear as having no relationship with the doctrine of ahiṁsŒa, but a thorough study would reveal that it is only the theory of karman that can be derived from non-violence. The theory of karman expresses that a man is himself responsible for his own spiritual advancement, happiness or misery in this life or the next. The gods or the demons do not assist or hinder in building the fate of the individual. It is his own efforts or past deeds that make his life happy or miserable. The curses or boons from demons or gods or similar supernatural powers do not affect the spiritual advancement of the person except his own deeds called the karman, when these karman obstacles are removed by one's own effort, lighter the soul becomes, higher it reaches in the spiritual field (karmans according to Jainas are material substances covering the soul due to which it is in bondage).

These are thus the manifold aspects of the Jaina doctrines of which non-violence is the basis; moreover it is the root of all other vratas (vows) of the Jaina ethics. Before passing to the actual vrata (vow) of non-violence, it would be more systematic to deal with what violence actually is. For this purpose it is necessary to deal with the analytical classifications of violence. Analysis and classification is the speciality of the Jaina system which depicts the acuteness, accuracy and alertness of the Jaina thinkers in dealing with the fundamental concepts regarding their own conduct as well as of others.

To start with, hiṁsā is classified according to various stages of violence. These stages are three; firstly, 'samrambha' i.e. intention to commit an act of violence, secondly, 'samarambha, the stage of preparation for committing an act of violence. Lastly, 'arambha', the stage of actually committing a preplanned act of violence. Each of these three stages is divided into three types. These are: (i) to commit an act of violence oneself, (ii) to order somebody else to do it, and (iii) to appreciate or approve an act of violence done by someone else. Each of these nine types is further divided in accordance with the three instruments of mind, speech and body; these are twenty-seven in all. These twenty-seven varieties are sub-divided in accordance with the differences in the motives of the person; the motives are anger, conceit, crookedness and greed. In this way violence is divided in one hundred and eight types. This classification is very clear and comprehensive, it enables a person to make a proper scrutiny of his own conduct, he can with such an analytical method make out distinctly his own defect or failing and that how far he himself is responsible in a particular act of violence which may sometimes be caused by external factors. But the classification is incomplete, since it does not refer to the degree of intensity of the passions. There are four degrees of intensity of motives. The first stage of intensest passions of anger, conceit, crookedness and greed is called anantanubandhi (i.e. obstructions in the right attitude). The second stage of a little less intense motives is called apratya-khyana (obstructions in the partial discipline of the house-holder), the third stage is still less intense and is called pratyakhyanavarana (obstructions in the complete discipline of the monks), and the last stage is the mildest of all called samjvalana (obstructions in attainment of liberation).

In the first stage of 'anantanubandhi' these motives (or anyone of them) are so overwhelming that a man loses his alertness altogether and he does not even possess the right attitude (or samyaktva) which is basic in spiritual enhancement. At the stage of 'apratyakhyani' his motives are a little less intense but still he is not in a position to develop right conduct, in spite of the fact that he has acquired right attitude. At the third stage of 'pratyakhyanavarana' the passions are milder, and he adopts, though only partially, the right conduct which he lacks in the second stage, he adopts at this stage the partial vows of the laity. At the last stage of 'samjvalana' the passions are in the mildest form, which are fleeting and evanescent; they are compared to a line drawn in water which disappears at the very moment. This is the stage when the individual adopts the complete vows of the monk. But since the passions are still there, they obstruct the attainment of liberation; these four stages are the abridged from of the fourteen stages of the fourteen stage of spiritual development (gunasthanas). With this clear and distinct concept of violence and its different types, the actual precept, technically named as 'panaivayao veramanam' meaning abstention from hurting the vitalities of any living being, can be discussed. Apparently, the term reveals only the negative aspect of nonviolence, but that does not mean only a purely negative injunction meant for the monks or for the laity. The positive aspect of this precept can be significantly seen in various scriptures. Sympathy, love, pity, etc, are given then due place. The term used to signify this pity, sympathy for saving the lives of the living creatures, is called abhayadana, i.e. giving the gifts of fearlessness to living creatures. Abhayadana not only means avoidance of giving fear to someone but also to free him from the fear of others. It is said that the hurting of living beings is the hurting of one's own self, while feeling sympathy or pity for others is feeling sympathy or pity for one's own self. Further it is said, "Just as you yourself hate suffering, and therefore one should respect, love and sympathize with all the living beings. Compassion, pity or sympathy is included in the five characteristic signs of the very right attitude (Samyakdarsana). Various examples of this can be cited from various sources which depict that it is not only abstention from violence but also the positive attitude of love or sympathy, which is to be regarded as equally moral and praiseworthy. In Jainism, there is proper room for love and compassion the positive aspect of non-violence for saving the living beings.

Non-violence in Buddhism

In the Buddhist ethics non-violence tops the list of Pancasilas (five vows). The importance of ahimsa, needless to say, is significantly emphasized in the Buddhist scriptures. So far as the theoretical presentation is concerned, one would hardly be able to apprehend any difference in Jainism and Buddhism, because they have the same approach to the burning problems of life and also they revolted against one and the same trend. But in practice, the difference becomes apparent because the Buddhists were moderate in practical conduct while the Jainas were stringent. Dhammapada (Religious text) proclaims that only those attain happiness after death or achieve the ultimate end of Nibbana (salvation) who have established themselves in non-violence. The basis of nonviolence, though not very explicitly stated in the Buddhist scriptures as such, is something very much akin to the Jaina ideal of 'samata', i.e. treating all creatures lower or higher as equals. It is said, "Every creature is afraid of punishment, death is the most formidable thing for every living being. Taking oneself as personally involved in the death of another creature, one should himself abstain from killing or pounding badly any living creature, nor should he inspire others for doing so."

Not only in Buddhism but in all the Indian religion man is regarded as solely akin to animals (though man is highly evolved). Therefore, compassion to animals is equally necessary. Buddhism Promulgates, "Let him not destroy or cause to be destroyed any life at all or sanction the acts of those who do so. Let him refrain even from hurting any creature, both those, that are strong and those that tremble in the world." These are the few extracts which tend to show the importance of non-violence, which is based on equality of all creatures in Buddhism, not in the sense of mere abstinence from injury but also in the sence of feeling of love for all living creatures small or large. "Not only do we find in Buddhism the concept of ahimsa as a mere negative or abortive principle indicating the avoidance of the vain destruction of animal life but it also regards that it is the duty of every Buddhist to care for the well-being of all animals.

In the feeling of love, lies the positive aspect of non-violence. The reasons for this negative nomenclature have already been shown and the same holds good in Buddhism also. A purely negative precept is only one-sided and partial, its positive counterpart is natural and necessary. Moral values originate from the very psychological make-up in which a predominant place is occupied by 'love'. The feeling of love designated by various names such as compassion, friendliness (karuna or metta) has been given special favours in Buddhism. The Middle path theory of Buddhism in this sense has made a more realistic approach to life. For those who are in distress, as the first noble truth points out, compassion is needed to be cultivated. Thus the positive aspect of non-violence in terms of compassion, sympathy, friendliness occurs in a very high degree in Buddhism where it has remained not only an ethical principle, but also the basis of even philosophical conceptions, and where the concept of karuna or mahakaruna (enlightened compassion) surpasses all other philosophy or ethical principles.

Certain examples can be quoted from various Buddhist scriptures, which tend to show the place occupied by the positive side of non-violence. It is said, "Suffuse the world with friendliness, let all creatures both strong and weak see nothing that will bode them harm and they will learn the way of peace." It is further said "if a man lives a hundred years and engages the whole of his life and attention in religious offerings to gods sacrificing elephants and horses and other thing, all this is not equal to one act of love in saving life. The typical form of intense and self-surrendering devotion is that of mother's love, just as the type of overwhelming sorrow is that of a bereaved mother. It is emphasized that such a type of love and compassion should be developed with a boundless heart and mind for all the creatures of the world, great or small, upward and downward, and thus one should try to disentangle oneself form ill-will and enmity. Goodwill and friendliness express even more than the word love, the expanded sentiment of amity to all living beings, which the average man cherishes only for a personal friend or comrade. The term 'amity' seems to be the substitute for Jaina 'equality'. The cultivation of amity (caritas), pity, sympathetic gladness, and equanimity formed a sort of sublimated or higher sila or code of moral.

The positive side of non-violence is the practice of four 'Brahmavihars' (best dispositions), which, in fact is the psychological analysis of non-violence. These 'Brahmavihars' are four in number; in other words non-violence can be divided into four types, viz. Metta (friendliness), Karuna (compassion), mudita (goodwill) and uppekka (indifference). These are the four different mental stages constituting the best purificatory devices for one own self. For a clearer picture of these 'brahmaviharas' a little discussion is required as to what they actually are and what they are not.

Metta

Metta is friendliness in the positive and (adosa) non-enmity in the negative terms. It simply means directing love towards all living creatures. It helps one's own self because it minimizes (adosa) hatred, it helps others on whom it is bestowed because he gets something what he lacks. But metta or friendliness is not rooted in raga or attachment, which is not a help but a hindrance for the proper upliftment. Raga too has similar characteristic signs in appearance but it lacks the right knowledge (sammaditthi)

Karuna

Karuna (compassion) is aroused by seeing someone in distress. It means the identification of the person with him who is in distress. It is the softening of the heart. The desire for violence automatically subsides in this stage, but here too a careful check should be imposed lest karuna should change into soka (anguish) which is again a hindrance for genuine morality. 'There is suffering' is the generative organ of the feeling of compassion or karuna for all beings. Thus compassion is made supermundane by this school of Buddhism. It does not remain only ethical but becomes metaphysical too.

Mudita

The third state mudita does not explicitly depict itself as a part of nonviolence like the previous two brahmaviharas. The symbol of Mudita is joy or delight. Mudita is a feeling of disinterested love, when in others certain virtues are seen; one does not feel envious of other's progress and virtues. It, therefore, shows an effort on one's part towards the maintenance of the happiness of others; this indicates a non-violent attitude towards oneself as well as towards others. The ill passion of hatred is naturally subsided and soft heartedness becomes the prominent feature.

Uppekkha

The last state is that of upekkha or indifference. An extreme indifference can be said as equivalent to the final stage of moksa (salvation), which is all-negative, but in it culminates the positive effort. It is the state where no question of favourableness or unfavourableness remains. Even in the most extreme circumstances of sorrow or misery one remains totally undisturbed. But this type of indifference or uppekkha is to be distinguished from the indifference of those who do not even possess right attitude and are indifferent just owing to their ignorance and absence of knowledge of right and wrong. In brief, these four brahmaviharas act as an easier of ill mental modifications of four types, raga (attachment), dosa (hatred), is a (jealousy) and usuya (intolerance), and help in achieving the final goal.