God is an Atheist

Your God, my God, it doesn't matter, is an Atheist. If you are a believer, you are obviously going to be upset or even incensed by this statement. If you are not going to setout on a mission to eliminate me from the face of this earth, i can possibly engage you in an argument, as to why this is true.

First, let me set a basis for what i mean by an atheist, and i am not about to twist the generally accepted meaning. Provided below is the meaning from Webster.

atheist (noun) athe· ist | \ ˈā-thē-ist \
Definition: a person who does not believe in the existence of a god or any gods.

Now, that's not how most people use this word tho. Usually, people use the word atheist, to refer to a person who questions their current practice of faith. To further elaborate this, any person who questions the existence of God, does not agree with a particular religious philosophy, does not conform to the current practices within a particular religion, or simply were to provide a different argument for God is referred to as an atheist.

The largest religions around the globe today, that have more than 500 million followers, are Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, and Buddhism. All of these, with the exception to the Hindu religion, is based on a monotheist philosophy and were begun by a single proponent of the idea, a century or more ago. Let me dive a bit deeper into the beginning of these faiths, and present a case of atheism.

Jesus questioned the practice of the Jews. He ridiculed the practices followed in the temple. He was found guilty of crimes of religion(?), and then finally crucified on a cross like a common criminal for this belief.
Islam emerged from the shadows of Christianity and Judaism, with the proselytizing by Mohammed. He was not recognized as a Prophet immediately and had to undergo several threats and attempts on his life, because of his attempts to change the current belief system.
Buddhism is attributed to the teachings of Buddha, and his teachings questioned the current philosophy practiced, at that time Hindu or the Vedic religion. While many concepts and constructs were similar or adaptations from the Vedic religion, it did present a strong basis to discredit the current thinking and practices of the Hindus.

Hinduism is a polytheistic religion, where several gods and goddesses exist to serve the needs and faiths of the large groups that are generally clubbed together as Hindus. And by definition, while there are several commonalities and similarities in all these groups, there are also regional, linguistic, and even Vedic basis that creates enough differences. Theoretically many Hindu philosophers agree that this religion is inclusive of any and all, and even atheist. But i am not so sure that the atheists will completely agree. The biggest example in Hinduism on the existence of Aethism is the story of Krishna and Goverdhan, where he professed to the people in his village, that it is not necessary to pray and pay obeisance to Indra.

All smaller religions have similar basis of existence, specially the ones that were founded by an individual. These are usually a reaction against a current practice and an attempt to improve or alter the thinking. Sikhism, Bahai, Falun Gong, and any of the new groups or faiths.

All of them began on the basis of a quest of something better and different. And hence the God we profess faith too, is an Atheist.

Tat Tvam Asi - തത്ത്വമസി

Sabarimala hosts the temple of Ayyappan, located in the Western Ghats range within the Pathanamthitta district in Kerala. The temple is on a hilltop, that is more than 4000 feet above sea level. The Sannidhanam, or the sanctum santorum, is a good climb of about 7-8 kilometers using the shortest route from the banks of Pamba. But, to reach the Sannidhanam, there are a few unwritten rules you need to adhere, that are handed down during the past few decades that people have been going there.

You start with a penance for 41 days, where you keep your physical and mental body clean. Clear your mind of impure thoughts, and develop the ability to remain calm when faced with extreme emotional influence. Specifically people are advised to control anger and not use any foul language. To signify the beginning of this penance, you put a "mala", a chain made of sandalwood or other wood denoting to others that you have begun the journey to reach Ayyappan. Immediately after this ritual, people will also start refering to you as "Ayyappan".

After you kept your promise to yourself during these 41 days, you will need to carry what is called an "Irumudi"; literally meaning "two bags". The bag, actually one bag, that has two compartments, where one is reserved for all the items that are going to be your offering to Ayyappan. The other compartment is for personal items, that you typically require for your journey, ie eatables etc. In earlier days, food was not available near the Sannidhanam, and you had to come back to Pamba. But these days, more offerings are carried in these portions, because of access to food during the journey back and forth.

With a good irumudi, you are now ready to proceed on your journey. There are many ways to reach the Sannidhanam. I will focus on the shortest, which is not necessarily an easy one. The one that i have used. The closest town to the Pamba river entry point to the Sabarimala is Nilakkal. During peak seasons, the government will require all private transportation to stop at this town and then use the KSRTC (government) bus service to reach the Pamba. From Pamba, you take a quick bath in the river. There are times when the water is running very low, and also the bathing ghat can be crowded, and also dirty. For many reasons, the bathing has become a courtesy or a forgone ritual to many. You pay your respects to Pamba Ganapathy and begin your hike.

A good hike, with the irumudi on your head, which is not very heavy, but soon becoming very burdensome, as you climb the steep hill. Since the path is not paved (atleast till the last time i went), there are other obstacles that you encounter. Sharp stones, slippery slopes especially during rain, but one thing is for sure, there are no wild animals.  You reach the main temple zone, and you have one final ascent, the 18 steps to the Sannidhanam. These are at a very high gradient, and you are nearly falling on the person below as you climb up. Once you cross the 18th step, you are in front of the entrance to the Sannidhanam. That's when the truth will hit you. It should it.

Written across the entrance of the Sannidhanam, in huge letters in Malayalam and Devanagari script, is what you were looking for; "തത്ത്വമസി" & "तत्त्वमसि" - "Tat Tvam Asi". Meaning "Thou are that".

You are the one that you seek. After all this journey, this simple truth is revealed to you. That the "one" that you seek is in "you". That God is in you. That God is you. That God and you are the same.

Did you have to come this far? Did you have to endure this journey? Maybe you did, maybe you didnt. The answer again only is known to you. But the hints were always there. The moment you decided you were going to Sabarimala, and you wore the "mala", you were called Ayyappan, by one and all around you. You had already recieved this information, but it takes time to realize the meaning.

For this reason, Sabarimala is open to all. People of all faith are welcome. People adorn in black or blue, colors that are very different from the saffron that is associated with the Hindus. The significance is very important. Recent attempts to change this notwithstanding, the beauty of Sabarimala Ayyappan was that he welcomed all, with a special love for first timers, referred to as Kanni Ayyappan.

Pray to him, pray to yourself. Seek within yourself. You will find it - Tat Tvam Asi!

Kun FayaKun (كُنْ فَيَكُونُ)

Growing up, i had the opportunity to visit many different temples of worship, of different faith. Hindu temples, Christian churches of the Catholic, Protestants and few others, Sikh Gurudwara, Jewish Synagogue, and also the temples of Jains, Buddhists, and a few other faiths, and other places of worship or prayer halls. Most if not all, seemed to follow a set pattern.

Inside the main hall there is usually a focal point, and while being seated anywhere, you had access or a view to this focal point. In a Hindu temple, it was the idol. And most if not all the other places of worship had a symbol, even if it was not a specific idol. Sometime it was a book, or it was pedestal from where the preacher or a leader would lead the prayer. It was easy to get used to the differences amongst the many religions and focus on this unifying theme of a place of worship.

It is easy to be mislead, like any wayfarer views, Hinduism to be a religion that propitiate a stone idol in place of god. As you mature in the faith, you realize and become aware of other teachings in vast truth of Hindu teachings, that god is universal. God has many forms. An idol is simply a symbol of god, and only a token to help your mind focus. And then it is easy to appreciate the different systems of faith, and how invariably, every religion that abhors idol worship, has to succumb to the trappings of us mortals. That God needs to be replaced by a symbol of some sort. The choice of the symbol, like the gods, are many.

All of these teachings and learning, didnt prepare me for my first visit to a Mosque. My first visit to a mosque, was the Jama Masjid in Delhi. For whatever reason, i didnt get the opportunity to visit a mosque before that. I have seen many a Dargah, but also realize the difference in this Sufi tradition of Islam, from some of the core tenets of Muslim belief system. God is formless, as God is beyond all this. I get that part, as there exists a similar concept within the teachings of other religions too. But there is philosophy, and then there is the practical offer of a prayer.

When i walked through the main courtyard of the Masjid, and arrived at, what would otherwise been the location of an idol or pulpit, i was instead greeted by a book shelf. Although this was part of a pleasure trip, the visit to the mosque, was not just to see around, but also offer prayers. And so, here was me, standing just before this old wooden shelf, filled with even older looking books, i would presume they were copies of the Qur'an.

I suddenly felt lost. I was unsure, what to do next. I am not a Muslim, nor had i before this, attempted to learn how Muslims offered prayer. All this was immaterial though, because in my mind it should have been simple as walking up to sanctum sanctorum, and offering your prayers. Well in this case, i was perplexed, as there was no defined sanctum sanctorum. And even if this was the center or a pivotal point within the mosque, there was nothing to grasp my attention.

This shelf of books also stood in front of a rather imposing wall, which was carved into a nice facade, looking like an arch. I didnt know then, but now know, this is the Mihrab, which helps point the direction to Mecca to the Muslims.

As i stood there, contemplating for a few seconds, i was able to better understand the concept of a formless god. Hindus see god in every form. But here i had to come to terms with this new idea. New idea? Not at all. At the least, not to me. No matter which temple i visit, my prayers are always done with my eyes closed. And so, truly when i think about it, the temple, an idol or a sanctum is only helpful in creating an apt ambiance and an appropriate atmosphere. But, standing here facing nothingness, was an important lesson, often missed out in temples and other idolatry worship. It was a reckoner to the fact, sometimes it is difficult to conceive the inconceivable. And so, even with a lot of gyaan around this, i was for a moment, taken aback.

We take it for granted that it is so easy to access or imbibe the spirit, we call god. Its in a picture, in a name, in an idol, a book, a cross, a stone, a metal, even a piece cloth. Its quite another thing to think that it is, but unfathomable. It is, beyond comprehension. And hence i think the reason to mandate that it be kept that way in Islam. A difficult choice to make, but when adhered to, a creates a truly higher plane of thought.

In the end, when you think about it really deep, you will understand: many forms, any forms, no form, are all the same.

Jab kahin pe kuch nahi bhi nahi tha
Wahi tha Wahi tha Wahi tha Wahi tha

Woh jo mujhme samaya
wohjo tujhme samaya
Maula wahi wahi maaya

Kun fayakun Kun fayakun

Creation Theory

I am not so sure if God created man/woman or whatever. But it appears that man did create God. Every major religion in the world today, has some story around the creation of a man and a woman. The most popular across the world, atleast the Christian and Muslim world, is the story of Adam and Eve. Hindu literature speaks of Manu, who was the first man created by God. There is an entire page on Wikipedia, that is dedicated to the first man and or woman.

However, the more i think about it, the more i am certain, the story is entirely the opposite. God was created by man, not necessarily the first man. He had to. There was simply no way to control the unruly masses. Some form of laws were important. Laws alone were not enough, because, people probably found out that, they could break these laws, without having to worry about punishment. Talk about a flawed justice system. There had to be a higher being, that we all feared and willingly accepted as lord. The punishment for sins and rewards for good deeds were perceived, and not real. I am sure you understand how easy it is to convey perception of pain or reward, than the actual reward itself. Man, bestowed by eternal greed, fear and despair or by the quest for bliss and joy, can be influenced more by a promise than anything tangible.

God is invented or created by man, with a form of his likeness. This God is then presented as someone to be feared, and so must be appeased. The likeness then takes on fearful appendages and weapons. Or sometimes the God is merciful, and then is cloaked in white to signify purity and peace. The imagery must be the reason why some of the newer religions, atleast one in particular, require that there be no image at all to represent God. But even this attempt has not been fully successful, because people have attempted to fabricate alternates, like symbols to personify or equate to God.

The biggest causation for this theory is the medley of God and religions. Each religion has its God. Many of the newer religions, that originated in the Common Era (CE), have one or more Prophets, holy books, and its house of prayer. Each conceivably, distinct from the other. But, each new religion or faith, simply modifies  the set of beliefs in practice at that time. The hope and intent is for Man to evolve into something better, but invariably it can also regress or simply diverge. Man constantly evaluates the moral code structure and wants to gravitate to something different.

Few of the older religions, Hinduism in particular, professes polytheism, and provides its followers an array of gods and goddesses, and also demons and evils. The more the merrier, seemed to be their philosophy. Even the later religions that profess monotheism have not been able to control its followers, and have them adhere to its basic tenets. Many of them have varied branches, that can be radically different from the claimed origins. Man, it seems will not be bound down, when it comes to him and his God. He is more than willing to experiment, and if required another God to suit his tastes.

And finally, if God did really exist, she would clearly have done a better job, than create this species, which manages to invent unique ways to find unhappiness.

What's in a name?

Strange as it seems, a mere name plays a small but important role in the large scheme of my beliefs and my religion and culture. I am not referring to name of inanimate objects or other living creatures, but referring to our names, mine and yours. At an earlier instance, i had blogged about my name, and how it came about. My name was picked by my grandmother. These days you hear about people picking fancy names with intricate meanings, sanskrit one, ancient ones, new and modern ones, famous ones. Ram, Krishna, Aishwarya and Vijay (name used often by Amitabh in movies) used to be some very common ones. 


How does this all matter? And specially what is the religious connotation? Its clear what link that names like Krishna and Ram have. Children are named after personal gods and goddesses as way to appease their deities. Some parents name their children, in the fervent hope that they live up to their names. That will explain the numerous Kalam and Sachin that abound India.


All this seems so foreign, rather noise to me now. A small, and possibly insignificant lament by elderly neighbour fed my thought cells, with the most brilliant concept. It was not new, and is possibly known for centuries to others in India, but not me. To me this single explanation was meant to last a lifetime. 

We used to call this elderly neigbhour, KRK Uncle. KRK is initials, and i will leave it at that. He had named his children Shankaran, Raman and Narayanan, typical malayalee names of these lords. Of course, school, college and workplace had butchered their names to Shanks, Ram and Nara. I was sitting and have some idle chat with him, when someone referred to his youngest by this short name Nara. He politely answered the query, and sent off the enquirer. He then turned to me, and lamented about how names are being butchered. He then said, "in those days, we used to name our children, after gods. At our death bed, when we called out to our sons and daughters, we had the privilege of dying, while uttering the name of a god. It was believed that would take us to heaven." 


What struck me most was not the heaven or the dying part, but the fact that everytime one called out the child's name, you were calling the lord's name too. As i said earlier this simple explanation, prevailed on me. It was clear to me then, that this would influence the name i chose for my child. I called my son, Govind. A trip to Thirupati, few years before the birth of my son, influenced this particular variant of Krishna's name. 

Well there are intentions, and best laid out plans. I can tell you this. I chant the lord's name almost a thousand times a day. It usually takes about ten utterances of Govind, in increasing  tenor and temper, to gain my son's attention. Someone is surely paying attention, and extracting a price.

Oru Jati, Oru Matham, Oru Daivam Manushyanu

These were the words of Sree Narayana Guru, it simply means, "One Caste, One Religion, One God for all mankind". I was born a hindu, and brought up so. But i also had to fortune to go to schools which which professed a different thought or none at all. My family also helped, because their was no direct imposition of strictures, other than a regular evening prayers, but we were also taught about humanity and brotherhood. My first direct exposure to the concept of one man, one god, or rather one man, many gods (both indirectly preaching the same concept or universal love), was from the singer KJ Yesudas.

I must have been 8 or 9, when life was full of black and white only. Yesudas had come to sing at our school, Bain School (a christian school run by Church of South India), as part of some fund raiser. The crowd was filled with malayalees, including our family. He singing was interrupted after about an hour or so, by some elaborate garlanding ceremony of a whole bunch of people. He soon ended the program, with thanks, but was clearly distraught. The interruption my mother believed was because he sang a few classical songs (bordering on devotional), altho' i dont particularly recall anything specific. We came out and waiting for my dad to pull his car, when we noticed that the real Gana Gandharvan was sitting in a black Ambassador near us, waiting for space to pull his car out. My mother walked up to him, tagging us along, and asked him, "why didnt you sing any Ayyappan songs", to which he pulled a rudraksha chain he was wearing around his neck, showed my mom three or four lockets, one ayyappan, one guruvayoorappan, one jesus and something else. He said, "for me all gods are one", and if we wanted to hear him sing more Ayyappan songs, we could visit his next program in chennai at a local ayyappan temple. The image of the chain extended by his palm, the lockets, and his bearded face mouthing those lines are still vivid in my memory.

This concept was further reinforced at my next school, Asan Memorial. I would later come to know that this founders and the trustees of the school were also devotees of Narayana Guru. But my school prayer was not any elaborate devotional songs, but a simple recital of a sloka by our painting master. And if he was absent, then we said the 'Father in heaven', christian prayer recited by our piano teacher, and sometimes a few small prayers by others. 

I came to fully understand and know about Narayana Guru much later. I remember passing the temple dedicated to him at Vepery, in Chennai, wondering who this man was. I also thought it was some jain cult or some nondescript guru from the north of India. When i did come to know of him, i still wondered this temple had his statue. I am yet to understand that, and more on this a little later.

A Doordharshan program in the 80's, introduced me to Sree Narayana Guru. The single biggest thing that struck me most about him, was the temple he opened in Kerala, were he consecrated a mirror as the prathishta (idol), to be prayed. Already a little attuned with the philosophy of Adi Sankaracharya, i was amazed by this simple yet sublime act. In one stroke, he displayed eloquently the Advaita philosophy. I interpret this as, 'pray to the god that you see in you', or 'you are the god you seek'. Of course, understanding this and appreciating these will require a lot more learning and discipline. But this temple would help bring this concept closer to the people, instead of some abstruse philosophy.

More readings and understandings, brought forth, the revolution he started in Kerala, changing its culture and traditions forever. I always abhorred the caste system, and never felt that true hinduism ever preached it, or practiced it, they way it was done in last few centuries. Narayana Guru's action to break these barriers and to educate people about these malpractices were the other actions that endeared him to me.  And before i forget, his teaching was again reiterated, by a song sung by Yesudas, 'Oru Jathi Oru Matham', in a music cassette of  songs and poems written by Narayana Guru.

This mantra has always reverberated in my mind and soul. We are all one, we just seek different paths to reach our goals. There is no need to play on these differences. Every religion, seem to agree that there is only one god. But the followers take that to mean that the other gods are somehow illegitimate and/or non-existent. Instead of understanding the unanimity professed, people accentuate the anomaly. It is therefore, important to once again reiterate these teachings.

Why Krishna Killed Karna?

Most all casual readers or even a few astute followers of Mahabharata are easily fooled into thinking that Karna was killed by Arjuna. Even though throughout the Mahabharata, Krishna constantly indicates that Arjuna is nothing but an instrument in his hands. My previous blog about these two protagonists, Krishna and Karna, raised a lot of discussion regarding the two sides at war, with a lot of people getting lost in choosing between the righteous Pandavas versus the self-righteous Karna.

Rarely, if not no where, during the course of Mahabharata does Krishna speak spiteful of Krana. In fact there are several instances when he has sung the praise of Karna and also admonished Arjuna a few times, when he boasted about his skills or spoke ill of Karna. Krishna even reasoned with Karna, to support the just cause of the Pandavas, and not to blindly support his friend Dhuryodhana. Sadly, but well to his credit, Karna does not yield to Krishna's advice or guidance. It is this stance that has helped Karna accrue his league of supporters, 'steadfastness'. Unfortunately, loyalty to the wrong cause, can only be sympathized, and cannot be admired as a quality of a well read person.

So, then to the question, of the blog. Why did Krishna kill Karna? Many a commentator of Mahabharata, including me, believe that Krishna's role in this epic was clearly not portrayed as a person who always followed the rules. He, more than once, broke the rules to achieve his goals. A clear characterization, showing that the end is equally, and sometimes more important than the means. To some extent, it shows the evolution of the dharma professed by the hindu thinkers and gurus, that the power of evil was increasing, and a straight forward fight between good and evil, did not guarantee success. Even god, had to adopt to some trickery to fool and defeat the people on the wrong side of the law. The whole life of Krishna as depicted in the different stories, revolve in a very political world, where the forces of evil and good were even more difficult to determine clearly. Unlike Ramayana, in times of Krishna the big war was not fought with asuras or demons, instead it was fought between members of a family.

Karna stood by loyalty, over the choice of righteousness. It was this same steadfastness of Karna, that resulted in his death. Even upon learning that his brothers were the ones that were being discriminated, he did not try to reason with his friend, Dhuryodhana. He instead, clouded his mind with all the atrocities he suffered at the hands of the Pandavas, Draupadi, his own mother and even his own guru. His reasoning was flawed, for all his loyalty and by his own dharma of karuna. It appears that he himself was in a state of turmoil, and reasoned that his loyalty and support to Dhuryodhana, surmounted any and all other considerations. His skills and prowess now needed to be neutralized, and when all reasoning by Krishna and negotiations failed, death was the only option left. At the end it was war, and someone had to lose, because it was a kill or be killed battle. So, the helplessness of the opponent was an appropriate state, given the circumstances, and was fully utilized by Krishna.

With Karna trying to retrieve his chariot wheel, stuck in the mud, armed with no weapons, Krishna commanded Arjuna to kill him now, because there may not be another oppurtunity. He dismissed all pleas for mercy by Karna, saying he lost all his oppurtunity to ask for mercy earlier, and that there was no need to discuss about virtues at this stage, since he too was just as bereft when it make to virtuousness. He also dismissed any more discussions from Arjuna, saying the choice was not his, and he was just doing his duty, and as commanded by Krishna.

What is Om?

What is Om or Aum? The chart and the explanation for Om was what i took from the discourses of Bhagavad Gita, by swami Chinmayananda. He put it very simply, that Om is like 'x' in an algebra equation. An unknown, that we seek to find. We dont know who God is, so we shall represent him with a symbol, and that symbol is Om. He used this chart to show how the body, mind and intellect interacted with Om or God.

BMI chart as used by Swami Chinmayananda.

Of course there is more to Om, than just what i picked and highlighted here. But i found this very succint and stuck in my head. Now take this thinking a bit forward, like other math equations or logical reasoning. If Om were to represent God, it then represents any God. So no matter what name we call that being, it could then be represented with this symbol Om. Or rather another way to look at it is, to say people have replaced the symbol Om with names. Names they like to hear, names they like to say, names they like to sing, names they like for what it means, or names they like because of what it represents and many other reasons.

For me such a name is Krishna. I have my own reasons to pick this name, the image, the characterisation, the teachings etc. But yet, to me, he is just a god, could be any god, or could be used to represent any other god, as all others being an avatar of him. So i have replaced Om, in my equation with Krishna. Right or wrong, it works for me.

Idol worship

Idol worship is considered the bane of hinduism, and also of some other religions. The newer religions presented a more philosophical base to their thoughts, which only basically usurped the similar knowledge already available in the older religions. But the followers of these new religions seem to have ignored or overlooked the very strictures and teachings that talk about omnipresence and curse of objects and icons that are meant to symbolize the god. They, the followers, have in fact found new means to represent this faceless god with books, numbers, signs, objects, icons and even pictures.

Even scriptures in hinduism, have attempted to wean followers from their stupor, but have failed miserably in their appeal to the masses. Philosophers who have preached and touched people about these, are in turn, made into new icons of worship. It is common in hinduism, as in other forms of religion, that preachers and philosophers are consecrated and made into new demi-gods, only to give rise to new variations of the same religion.

The Hindu scriptures state that God is beyond comprehension by mind and intellect. Powerful as they are, their scope is insufficient to contain him. So the human mind is incapable of a true conception of God. The question, "Who made God?", arises only because mind cannot comprehend that which has neither beginning or end. 

- Paramahansa Yogananda.

Why is that people tend to overlook these, or are not able to fathom the depth of this philosophy? We are all children, or rather naive. Age of a person has never been representative of their wisdom or knowledge. It takes wisdom and courage to understand the difference between something that is 'beyond comprehension' and a block of stone that can be touched and bathed. Awareness of this difference, is probably easier to attain, because there are plenty who have been talking about this for a long time. But the courage to let go of the idol, that you so beheld all these years is more difficult to acquire.

And so till that moment, we, all of us, irrespective of our religion will continue to worship or look upon icons that symbolize god. Till then we are just a mere mortal, floating on log of wood, lost in the vast open sea, praying to a figment of our imagination.

Hey Ram!

Two words that has rocked this country for more than half a century. At first it was supposedly the last words uttered by Mahatma Gandhi just before he died. Much later it was used by Lord Ram's so called followers, who crushed a mosque, in the hope of building a temple for him. But more sadly is the utter fallacy of the use of these words by people who are so called Hindus, who have butchered muslims, again in the name of the Lord.

Ram in the story as translated to me, by my grandmother and much later by other seers and authors, was an embodiment of an ideal man. Maryada Purush, as he is referred commonly, a title even denied to other avatars of Vishnu.

3. Why is Shri Ram called a Maryada Purushottam?

As a person, Shri Ram personifies the characteristics of an ideal person who is to be emulated. He had within him all the desirable virtues that any individual would seek to aspire. For example, he gave up his rightful claim to the throne, and agreed to go into exile (vanvas) for fourteen years, to fulfil the vow that his father had given to Kaikeyi, one of King Dashratha's wives. This is in spite of the fact that Kaikeyi's son, Bharat, begged him to return back to Ayodhya and said that he did not want to rule in place of Shri Rama. But Shri Ram considered his dharma as a son above that of his own birthright and his life's ambition. For such supreme sacrifices, and many other qualities, Shri Ram is considered a maryada purushottam.

Source: VHP's website

This is from the same group that preaches intolerance and hatred, and takes the name of the same god who was willing for 'supreme sacrifices', in the name of dharma. Ram, during his final battle with Ravana, also gave him time to repent and seek forgiveness. People may question many different things done by Ram and the mythology surrounding him, but no one can accuse him of being a sadist and or a murderer, butcher of innocent men and women. In India today, his name is used in vain to protect hindus from the influence of other religions. Hatred is spread by his so called followers, to counter and subjugate muslims and christians and other minorities.

It appears that it is hindus who really need to be saved. Saved from these organization and followers, who are destroying the very fabric of the hindu religion. Their acts, be it protection of a temple or killing of muslims and their property, has absolutely no sanction within the hindu religion. It is high time that all the so called religious heads of hinduism like the babas, ammas, gurus and sri manji's, come out in complete protest against these people and their actions. Their silence and any mute protests are not helping the cause of the hindus or the religion.

Ram is a Maryada Purush. But his followers cannot or do not even aspire or attempt to follow any of his ideals or teachings. Lord Ram's message is a message of peace. That one must remain true to one's dharma. His life teaches us the power of sacrifice. Above all, i think there is a message of love, love to all around us, be it small or big, father or step-mother, rich or poor, friend or foe.

A million reasons to pray

Yesterday, i visited Tirupati, or rather the Balaji temple at Tirumala. As it has happened in the past, this time it was not easy to attain the 'darshan' easily. Like many major pilgrimage sites around the world, Tirupati (almost synonymous the temple, located at Tirumala, up in the hills nearby) also regulates the millions visiting the temple. I searched the internet for some statistics on how many people visit this temple annually, and came up with counts ranging from 19 million to 25 million a year.


The process to gain entry using the normal route can be very difficult and time consuming. This has lead to a lot of short-cuts to gain entry and obtain the 'darshan'.  Long back, i had walked away from the temple refusing to wait the time, among the myriad of other reasons, including paying money to see the god, obtaining help to reduce the wait time in the queue, and the manner in which the temple was being maintained. There is a belief, instilled in me, mainly by my mother, that the God of Tirupati, decides when you get to see him. I didnt believe it then, but after many failed attempts, this belief seems to have taken root in my psyche and so my special meaning to the word 'darshan'. Darshan as in, when you are granted the appointment to see the god.

Again, all this comes from the same person, who also toys with the idea of atheism and holds the belief that god is everywhere, literally everywhere and everything we see, feel or touch. So then why endure all this to pray at a temple. To wait hours in a queue to have a glimpse of a decorated piece of stone, covered in gold and other finery. A long serpentine queue filled with people in penury, to see a god who lives in an opulent home that is paved with gold. The biggest paradox is that you are pushed and shoved through a distance of less than 10 feet, during which if you see the idol for more than 2 seconds, you are blessed. And to further add to the anomaly here, like most people you close your eyes as you try to pray.

Yet, the reasons according to me are plenty. To me, today, the time i spent waiting in the queue to obtain the 'darshan', is my time to pray. This wait is almost an humbling process, when you consider that you are no different from the millions others waiting patiently or as restlessly as you to obtain the same fleeting vision. Every step as take to move closer to the inner sanctum, is moment to think and shed a layer of your ego. But most importantly, in todays world, the time spent waiting without a cell phone or tv or other world distractions (electronic kind), is a blessing in itself. You are only sorrounded by people, people like you and me, with all their shortcomings, held up as a mirror to you. So you can observe what you are or can be, or what you should never be, or what you must aspire to be.

Rules. What rules? Just pray.

Bhaja Govindam
Verse 1

भजगोविन्दं भजगोविन्दं
गोविन्दं भजमूढमते |
संप्राप्ते सन्निहिते काले
नहि नहि रक्षति डुकृञ्करणे ||

Bhaja Govindam, Bhaja Govindam
Govindam Bhaja Mudhamate
Sampraapte Sannihite Kale
Na Hi Na Hi Rakshati Dukrinkarane


Seek Govinda! Seek Govinda!
Seek Govinda! Oh Fool!
When the appointed time (death) comes,
rules of grammar surely will not save you.

Adi Shankaracharya's teachings (well i havent imbibed it all!) has always held a fascination for me. No sooner than someone explained a bit about his teachings and the concept of his philosophy, i believed that this path or his explanation rang close to what i could accept as the truth. I dont claim to have understood it all, nor do i claim to have read them all either. But this simple song or poem, call it what you want, has contained in it, many thoughts of philosophy and theology.

I have listened to the song, before i even knew what it was. The refrain of Bhaja Govindam, and the other most commonly quoted verse 'Punarapi Jananam  Punarapi Maranam' were well entrenched in my mind, much before i sat down to understand what it all really meant. These verses have also held a special place, thanks to music. Musicians, Carnatic and otherwise have sung these as a song tuned with music, again helping it take root in your psyche.

Adi Shankaracharya, and his disciples, credit with the creation of these verses, did not merely mean this to be a sing-song tune or a bhajan to raise the frevor of bhakti. It is instead small tidbits of advice to help one navigate their life through the ocean of maya and moha - delusion and desire. These verse promote the very core of the hindu philosophy, attainment of universal bliss - moksha. Moksha is attained many ways, and one path is the shedding of ego, desires and other worldy passions and emotions that rock your mind and soul.

To me personally, these verses have helped many a time, by allowing my mind to ponder about these 'rules' of life. How should we behave? react? respond? It is almost always at times of hopelessness, despair, loss of wealth or family or at time of deep fear. Fear again, because of not knowing what all your efforts will achieve ? Fear again of losing.

It also hold special signficance today, when people of differnt hues and religious persuasions, are attemping to color god and religion, with a singular safforon color. It shows to them, all rules, are to be broken, in the pursuit of god. Rules not just of grammar, but of who is of a high and low caste. Rules that tell you how to divide people. And funnily even rules that tell you how to annoint god. May be, this one verse goes out all of them, 'Bhaja Govindam......'.

Krishna - Govardhanadhari

In the era, that Krishna was born, and before, people worshiped god in the form of Indira, Agni, Varuna, Vayuu, etc. The nature, its forces and fury were paid full obeisance. The original forms of god, were these. Slowly but steadily, they were replaced by other forms of beings for worship. Like all other living beings, and life on this earth, it appears religion too evolved along with the human social upliftment and civilizations.

Krishna, was not the first of the reformer, or the creator of a new paradigm for our religion, nor was he the last. But even after many thousand years, he seems to have caught the fascination of people. People seem to be able to bond with Krishna at all levels, in all forms and through different means. The puranas and bhagavatham are filled with stories of how Krishna changed or challenged thoughts of the time he lived in. Constantly explaining and reintrepreting religion as we knew it then. Constantly reminding his followers, he is god, and none other.

One story about Krishna attempts at reform, centers around the Govardhan hill. Krishna came up on his tribe and villager, preparing for rituals and tributes to be offered to Indira, at the end of the monsoon season. He disauaded the villagers from offering prayers to Indira, the rain god. He explained that it is foolish to pray to someone sitting in the heaven, and someone who is supposedly responsible for all the good harvest. Instead, prayers should be offered to Govardhana, the hill right in front, that nutures live and provides the people and animals with all their needs. The story goes on to illustrate how Krishna taught Indira a lesson. How he protected the people by lifting the Govardhan hill, with his little finger.

If you choose to believe these theatrics, then you still come to understand that Krishna is the god almighty. If you dont, you then can gleam just the philoshpical truth behind the story, and still come to the same conclusion. There in, lies the essence of religion, specially the story of Krishna. As a child you can revel in the naughtiness and the playfullness of the baby. As a youth, you learn about love, like it shown or taught anywhere else. As you grow older, then you can reflect on the same stories, and see the more plainer truth and the real meaning of god, prayer and religion.

Hindu fundamentalism

It is often said by promoter and followers of the Hindu religion, that is 'a way of life' or 'Universal Religion'. It is one of the very few religions in the world that does not have a prohpet or a founder or single person responsible for its inception. Most detailed discourses about the evolution, for want of a better word, of Hinduism, center around the fact that there were numerous ideas and ideators, which helped fashion the core. The religion, practices, rituals, books, motifs, symbols and gods are just as many as there are followers. It is therefore virtually impossible to determine clearly when and how this religion came about. Although, religion as a concept required a certain evolution of social form of the humankind, before it had to take shape or form.

The Hindu religion was born out of arguments, discourse and dialogue between numerous proponents. It evolved from a clash of ideas. Sometimes diametrically opposite each other, as in including and support for the concept of atheism within its fold. If one philosopher taught that there was 'one god, with many names', another was quick to add that 'there were none and the god you prayed, was in you'. Every new century opened and introduced new paradigms. The wax and wane of the vaishnavites and shaivites, brought to fore the supreme nature of each of these gods. Mantras, rituals and sacrifices were the bane, introduced by some. While atman, brahman, and karma are the grace described by some. With Polythesim in practise, Monothesim as a concept, it was but natural to see how some people could be driven away.

It is in this context that you cannot, but react with a sense of amazement, that people who are the so called proponents of this religion today, take a very narrow centric view. The religion or culture has supported many of today's so called social evils for eons and centuries. But yet, we awaken each day to marauders burning and pillaging in the name of god. Again, they are only trying to save a tradition or ritual, which possibly is only a hundred years old, all in the name of a lord, who has been in existence for about a thousand or two thousand years. 

It is always difficult to rationalize with these. And there is no reason to do so either. This religious divide, which today is fought in the name of different gods, and externalized as hindu vs islam vs christianity, was very much a part of the internal divide within hinduism.  Kings who favoured different sects within the Hindu religion, have warred with others. Viewed from this angle, it just means we are going through a different revolution. Even in the last hundred years, movement like the Brahmo Samaj, Arya Samaj, Theosphical Society, Ramakrishna Mission and people like Gandhi, Narayana Guru, Aurobindo etc., have reformed or propounded different doctrines. While all these havent lead to bloodshed, they still have resulted in upheaval.

To all those who behave like fanatics and fundamentalist in the name of religion, they only need to look back in history, and see that they are not alone. However, they do need to understand that barring a few situations, mostly created by fewer individuals, many of these so called changes or thoughts have come in a peaceful manner. This religion promotes and depends on discussion, discourse and most importantly disagreements. If it weren't for disagreements, we would have missed out on many important texts and studies, that are considered integral part of the Hindu religion today. The first and foremost that sticks in my mind, is Adi Shankaracharaya and his theory that there is difference between the individual and god.

Saying thanks.

Kabir's Doha
दुख में सुमिरन सब करें, सुख में करे न कोय |
जो सुख में सुमिरन करे, तो दुख काहे को होय ||

Dukh Mein Sumiran Sab Kare, Sukh Mein Kare Na Koye
Jo Sukh Mein Sumiran Kare, Tau Dukh Kahe Ko Hoye

in pain prayers come to all, in joy no one at all
to those who thank for joy, why would pain befall

Kabir and his doha. They were a nightmare, when i had to study them as a kid in school, to pass the hindi examination. Although these were simple hindi statements, i remember having to read it repeatedly to suck it all in. These lines stuck in my head the most. The only one for which i got the meaning too.

The words of wisdom seem rather simple, and also easy to comprehend, 'cause many of us, including fall into the category he speaks off. Every moment we are faced with pain, sadness, challenge and or problem, we look to someone for help. A prayer is said, manytimes silent, and sometimes even cried out aloud, asking for help to solve the crisis ahead. Even if this does not translate into a miracle, many of us believe in them, because the pain or sadness goes away. Many times, you simply learn to endure, but with a new found friend, it becomes easier to share.

On converse, Kabir, is saying that if we are thankful of all the joy and pleasure that is granted to us day in and out, which invariably measures out to be a thousand times more than the pain and sadness, we will be able to comprehend pain a little better. And for such people, this moment of pain will not necessarily have the same effect. People who view pain and pleasure with the same metric, will surely understand, that you cant have one without the other.

Life is always full of ups and downs, what matters is how we react to each of these situations.

The Soul

Bhagavad Gita, Chapter 2, Verse 23

नैनं छिन्दन्ति शस्त्राणी नैनं दहति पावकः|
न चैनं क्लेदयन्त्यापो न शोषयति मारुतः||

nainam chindanti shastrani nainam dahati pavakah
na cainam kledayantyapo na shoshayati maarutah

it is not harmed by weapons, not burned by fire
cannot be wet by water, nor dried in air

The first time i heard this verse, it was sung in the form of a song by KJ Yesudas in his rendering of this chapter from the Bhagavad Gita. For a long time, through my teens, we went through our morning rituals listening the melodious assembly of un-understandable words. All it mattered to me at that time, was it helped soothed a stressful mind. Much later, after i knew how to recite these words and verses, i set about to understand, what i was saying. I did, however, the profoundness of this verse struck me much later when i was listening the chanting on TV, after the assassination of Indira Gandhi.

Listening to a lecture by Chinamayananda a little after, i remember him trying to explain the concept of the soul as the life in the body. He sighted the parlance in India, where people referred to a dead person as simply the 'body'. The reference was to the fact, once dead, the body was soulless, and therefore just the remnant shell used by someone.

Our body is made of cells, and other organs that simply cease to function, when dead. When life departs the body, the body starts decaying, since otherwise functional organs have stopped. Why? Where inside the body, does life exist ? How come over a million years since life was first created, and thousands of years since humans started walking around the earth, these cells and organs have not evolved their own survival mechanism? They still seem very attached to this 'life' or soul as some of us call it. When this soul departs, these organs have no defense mechanism.

What is a soul ? Where does it come from ? Where does it go ? Who does it owe allegiance to ? Who controls it ? How does it know its time to come or go ? Why does it leave otherwise perfect bodies ? Why does it stick around in ones that are shriveled and motionless with broken bones ?

A Theism

Atheism is rejection of 'theism' or as i would call it, belief in an alternate 'theism'. Atheism is not new to India or the Hindu religion itself. Neither is it the prerogative of people from the sub-continent. In Europe and the western world, atheism seems predominant within the scientific society or within societies that established political and government structures centered around Communist and Marxist philosophies.

In India too, today, the Communist are large preachers of the atheist theory. In Tamil Nadu, where i come from, atheist philosophies have been propounded by the Dravidian movement to counter the Brahman influence within the erstwhile congress party. The Dravidian party also provided my first indulgence with atheism and interaction with atheist philosophy. Thanthai Periyar from Tamil Nadu was alive when i was born and have some vague memories of news surrounding him.

Recently i also met a staunch communist in my family (family as we malayalee's call it, my brother-in-law's father-in-law !), who is self proclaimed atheist, while his wife and everyone else in the family are staunch believers. He has no problem in living with these believers, while he upholds his principles. It was an interesting experience, and i pulled up courage to ask him, who he called out to, in times of crisis or need. He didnt, was his answer.

While i am not an atheist, i dont condone this philosophy either. I think there is some rationale and meaning to it all. Come to think of it, we did evolve from a monkey, so then why is our god not looking like a monkey (well with an exception to Hanuman). Instead we have turned mortal philosophers into god, be it Krishna, Buddha, Mahavira, Jesus or Mohammed. All of them were born into this world and also died. And then there are stories about their immortality. Well about 200 years from now, people will find it difficult to believe that a half-naked old and fragile man was able to bring a mighty empire to its knees. Am sure stories told then will include magical staff, bullet-proof shawl and dhoti and also a powerful drug that he manufactured at the beach which was used later to overpower the British. Phew !!! What a story !!

So the long story short. Who is god ? Did god create us ? Or did we create god ? If there is no god, then how do you explain the fact that 'faith' has such a remarkable effect on people ? If God didnt come down and preach to us and show miracles and prowess, how does one explain these ? If we created God, why did we stop at one, two, twenty or hundred ? Why didnt we create a billion of them ? And if there is a god, why does he allow people to be killed in his name ?

Mine vs Yours

This is a debate that probably started when two women, men or whatever sex we were called then, started to contemplate metaphysics and created religion. Which is better? Mine or Yours? I think we are still not sure where the answer lies.

Hinduism is considered by many to be 'a way of life', an 'universal religion'. Growing up in India, you will surely believe this, since there is no true way to explain what being a Hindu is. I have attended the lectures on Gita given by Swami Chinmayanda. Poor soul has since given up speaking, well not because of me, but he answered his call from the powers above. In one lecture he stated the same, 'hinduism is an universal religion'.

Idle mind, they say is a devil's workshop. Well soon i had a letter drafted from my workshop, addressed to the Swamiji, asking him why then should he be worried about the conversion issue (in those days conversion to christianity/islam was a big issue - because of some mass conversions back and forth!!). My question was "If Hinduism is truly an universal religion, then why worry about conversion?".

I got a reply. I wasnt convinced. I wrote back. And i got an explanation update. I still was not convinced. I gave up. I still am not convinced. I admire him for the eloquent way, he explained the Bhagavad Gita. A lot of my thoughts were actually seeds placed by him. I also thank him for taking time out to reply to 'some arbit' me. But then at the end of the day, religion fails when it transcends into politics. This swami was not into politics, but began expressing worries about conversion, islam, christianity, the ganga jal yatra by the BJP etc. I stopped my association with his organization (i had enrolled with his yuva kendra) when he felt we must support the last mentioned program by the BJP.

However, the question remains.... "is your religion better than mine?". I wrote a similar piece but in a different context on my yahoo blog, titled "Blood Religion". But, the question there too, was the same.

Krishna & Karna

Many people compare Krishna and Karna, in Mahabharata and quickly choose the side of Karna. The typical reasons are because he was abandoned as a child, he was cheated by Krishna, he should have been treated as their brother, he was loved by Dhuryodhana and because he never said 'no' to anybody. Nothing seems to irk me more. Not because i dont agree with all of the above. But because with all of this, Karna still sided with the untruth or adharma.

I also did some research, thanks to the web, and discovered that he was also instrumental in the vastraharan of Draupadi. When Draupadi questioned the court how she could be used as a 'bet' when Yudhishtra himself had already lost. Karna in his explanation said that since Yudhishtra himself had lost, it was immaterial what happened later, every of his belongings, now was lost to Dhuryodhana. He further added insult with these commands, "O Duhsasana, seize the garments of the Pandavas and the robes of Draupadi and hand them over to Sakuni".

Why did Karna do this ? Why did he, a supposedly noble person, insult a woman in the court? Was it because she had refused to acknowledge his skills during her swayamvara? Was it because his hatred for the Pandavas was such that he didnt mind this path?

People who talk about his childhood and the injustice, should also not forget the injustice he served unto others. He, tho' noble in several deeds, is surely not the epitome of all that is noble. He was haughty as any other character in the great epic. And was filled with just as much pride. In the end, he was killed because he too was part of wrong.

Krishna had no qualms in killing him. I say Krishna killed him, because Arjuna was just an instrument. Through his Gita, he clearly explained this to Arjuna and us. People can question if the lord can take the law into his hands or if the lord can adopt not so straight forward means. Krishna himself says 'no'. Everyone will pay for his or her actions.

In the entire Mahabharata, Krishna gave ample oppurtunities to either side to exercise prudence and to correct their ways. He even approached Karna to change his ways, and the truth about his brothers. Karna, rightfully stood behind his friend. But he never tried to reason with Dhuryodhana, about his wrongs. Why ? Is it because he knew he was usefull to Dhuryodhana only if he spewed hatred against the Pandavas. What Krishna also highlights with these characters is that, it doesnt matter what the arms, protection, skills, knowledge, friends and family you have to support you? What matters, most, is that Krishna is on your side ?

Krishna

What is it about Krishna that attracts me ? Well, what is there not to be attracted to this icon? One of the few gods, that appeal to children, women, men, young and old, and even the rogues
? I think i must also thank NTR for my liking of Krishna. He is the one who constantly played the role of Krishna in movies. That was an image that stuck in my head for a long time, till Nitish Bhardwaj carried it off, with the same elan.

No its not about the image alone. There is the message. Numerous, tho some attributed to him, but you cant discount the whole Bhagwad Gita, which is his song to us poor souls. His vision for our salvation. There is so much in there and i have only scratched the surface.

I was born in Trishoor, Kerala. I grew up in Madras (now Chennai), but Trishoor was the place i lived every summer vacation for first 16 years. My grandmother (ammooma) was the first to introduce me to Krishna. I was also fortunate that i lived near the Thiruvambady temple in Trishoor. Between the sanctity of this temple and the stories narrated by my ammooma, i fell in love with this character who stole butter, irritated the towns people, women folk and other cowherds, played the fool with his brother and family, always caused worries for his mother but most importantly had his heart in the right place. It must have mirrored some of my qualities as a child. Think of it, so here is a god, that does everything you do as a kid. Now why would you conjure up anyother person to protect you from evil and bad dreams. Hanuman comes close, but then he is half monkey.

As i grew up, i was introduced to the Krishna, who saved his village form the wrath of another god, Indira. He did this, when Indira was angry because the people prayed to the mountain Govardhan instead of him. This story of Krishna taught me that rituals are just that rituals, and truth lies elsewhere. The Krishna in Mahabaratha was the epitome of all things right. His means to achieve dharma, also seemed so appropriate in todays worldly sense. He didnt hide behind all things godliness. He believed in the end, good must win, evil must be vanquished.

The ultimate revelation was the story of about Krishna's death. He died because he was not above the rules of his own dharma. He died to pay for his sins from a previous janma. It doesnt matter what these stories are, what matters is the hidden truth you see. And each person has to read and understand this on their own. My ammooma narrated these stories and explained her rationale, i took what i wanted and made some on my own

To me, these two lines from Bhagawad Gita, defines my entire purpose of religion and life.

karmaNye vaadhikaaraste maa phaleshu kadaachana|
maa karma phalaheturbhuu maate saNgotsvakarmaNi||"

Soon, for me, every god became just another name for Krishna. Talk about avatars. This was more than that. I used to call his name, no matter which temple i went, no matter which god i prayed to.

I am still far away from nirvana, as i have to pay for all my sins i have committed and a few i am working upon. I think it will take a while before i see the paramatma as described by Krishna. Till then, i have only one lord and god to look up to.