I have personally gone through extreme depression, and even suicidal tendencies. No scientific self-talk or medication really helped. But Krishna ultimately intervened.. It is my first-hand experience.
Blues do occur in life however spiritual or good one is.. But for a believer, that is just a test to reinforce Faith.. Atheists and agnostics arose in this world only because the majority were theists, and believers.(Gnostics).. Many call themselves atheists but for one to be a believer does not call for any reinforcement.. It is so natural..
However, when that Divine being, in His infinite mercy is just waiting for us to console us, as if a mother and father put together, if we do not avail of that overdraft account without any strings attached, who is to blame?
A story of a miserable wretch can be a case study; a man was dying in misery and ill health in the streets of Kasi. The Divine Mother and the Universal father Uma and Shankara were just seeing this. The mother in her boundless mercy asked the Lord, “Why my Lord, our child is suffering and why are you not giving him deliverance?"
The Lord replied, "He never asked for our help". And continued, “Okay, if he just calls either you or me, we can intervene"
Uma and Shankara were anxiously awaiting the call "Amma" or ;"Appa"..
But the man died crying "Ayyo"..
What to do?
There are extreme cases when the State, the law of the land, acts suo motu.. However, not in all cases. The human beings just emulated the Divine Law. When the chips are down, the Divinity is sure to intervene without asking... But Life or death or physical suffering of human beings appear to be minor episodes in the wide spectrum of Divine Law.. If we dispassionately compare the infinite expanse of the universe and the infinitesimally petty existence of ours, we can understand that God is just not intervening in small matters by Himself. However, when a person, for even an insignificant issue in the wider context, makes a plaint even before Supreme Court, that Apex Court considers it and takes some decision or directs a lower court to pass suitable orders.
Normally any judicial system or system of justice, presupposes a cause of action, and the most eminent cause of action is the representation by the affected party. Nevertheless, when the affected party is not in a position to make a request, the Temple of Justice acts suo-motu.
God has created mosquitoes and fleas to drink the blood of the cow, and He has created the tail of the cow to ward off these, if the tail is not used, and if the cow expects that God should come and finish the mosquitoes, it is a tall order.
Take the case of Mahabharatham. Krishna acted suo-motu and did not expect any petition to establish dharma. However, to supply clothes to Draupadi or to feed Durvasa, he expected a petition. Please appreciate the subtle difference. God can never be wrong.
Our rendezvous on this earth is only a part of an infinite continuum, where a jiva embarked on a journey in search of the supreme soul. The only handicap is that we do not have access to the data or log of our journey prior to our birth and perhaps after our departure, (I am not sure about this.) Maybe things become clearer later on.
It is a tightrope walk. A dynamic equilibrium. Unstable too. If Krishna does not interfere and correct the aberrations in our movements (a combination of linear an rotatory motion) we cannot live a reasonably good life.. This is irrespective of dwaitam and advaitam or Visistadwaitam... In addition, Shankara in his brahmasootrabhashyam and other writings is very clear in his view that a man can find true meaning in advaitic way of life only when he has renounced all worldly desires. Therefore, for us humans of ordinary kind, the very faith that there is someone to carry us through, be with us through thick and thin is the most essential thing. He leads and we follow. That logic is simple. Nevertheless, our mind-set and the endocrinal propensities would lead us to varying mental states. Faith alone can correct us.
In addition, faith is a matter of preference. If I choose to follow the path of Krishna, I am right.
If another person wants to lead his life as dictated by his emotions and senses, I cannot say he is wrong.
If everyone is going to make his own rules and sitting on judgement on the traditions based on long periods of experience of the ancestors, it is one's own choice. You can choose to amend the rules with proper consensus. However, just declaring that some rule is something according his interpretation and so it is wrong if someone sees it differently Age-old Dharmasastras and modern psychology may not see eye to eye on many issues.
In addition, quoting from a corner of a text and asserting that it is the ultimate rule is simply wrong... A mom and dad will surely wait for the child to call out, if they have been just training the infant to learn walking and he has just tumbled down, because if they rush to help on each fall, the child will never learn anything for himself. If you make some errors while doing an experiment in a lab, unless it is a major hazard, the teacher is not likely to come to your table without your calling him. Marjara and Markata logic in Indian philosophy is far deeper that a mom-baby play. Analogies are not identities. Clever people mix these two and drive home certain points. That is all.