I have some sort of tendency to hate neutrality. On the whole one taking such a position (non-committal) appears untruthful, maybe cheating or hiding something he doesn’t want to reveal. In some cases such positions seem cowardly.
This morning I read something that favors my tendency.
udāsīno ‘rivad varyam
ātmavat suhṛd ucyate
udāsīnaḥ — one who is indifferent; ari-vat — just like an enemy; varjyaḥ — is to be avoided; ātma-vat — like one’s own self; suhṛt — a friend; ucyate — is said to be.
“One who is neutral may be avoided like an enemy, but a friend should be considered like one’s own self.”
Perhaps there is something more in the background. When taken to the extreme, what is neutral? Neutral is brahma-vada, preference for a position in the impersonal oneness of Sri Krishna’s undifferentiated spiritual effulgence. It is a position hated by vaishnavas.
udāsīno ‘rivad varyam (“One who is neutral may be avoided like an enemy . . . ”); maybe not such bad tendency.
Swami B.K. Giri