Mandir and Mathematics: Reflections on Kejriwal's Speech

Early this month, while inaugurating the signature bridge in Delhi, Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal made a case that temples and statutes impede scientific progress and temper. He appealed to the people attending the event not to vote the electoral candidates who build statues and temples, but to the candidates who build mohalla clinics, schools, bridges, etc. I support this idea – voting the candidates to power who talk about science and technology, who build hospitals and bridges – but the idea that temples or religious places are detrimental to science needs deeper exploration.

Did/does building religious shrines, statues, memorials, etc. contribute to India’s poverty and underdevelopment? Is it corruption or temple building? It will be a good idea to make an audit of how much money is invested in temple building in independent India and how much money is involved in corruption? How many temples were built in independent India in comparison to pre-independent India? We know the great temples of India were not built in the last 60 or 70 years. But was India poor and underdeveloped during those periods?

According to Angus Maddison, the British economic historian, in the 16th and 17th centuries, India’s share of world GDP was more than 20 per cent, which gradually declined to 16.1 per cent in 1820 and 12.2 per cent in 1870. In 2017, this share was below 8 per cent. We know many temples in India were built hundreds of years ago. It was India’s riches and wealth, not only material but also cultural and spiritual, that attracted traders and travelers from all over the world.

One of the ideal examples of the blend of religious spirit and scientific inquiry that comes to my mind is Srinivasa Ramanujan, one of the greatest mathematicians of the 20^th century. Ramanujan was religious, and for him, ‘an equation has no meaning unless it is an expression of thought of God’. Ramanujan was scribbling mathematics on the temple floor. He believed that the Goddess was coming to him in dreams and revealing mathematical formulas. The Hollywood movie, ‘The Man Who Knew Infinity’ beautifully depicts his life including his religious beliefs and vegetarianism.

One of the greatest scientists, Isaac Newton, was both theologian and scientist. Though Newton was famous for bringing a new revolution to the field of science, his contributions to theology were not minimal. Newton was a devout Christian and wrote in Two Notable Corruptions of Scripture, “In human affairs the father of a family or house is frequently taken for the common father of a kindred: here the whole creation is considered as one kindred or family so named from God, the common father of all.” In a letter he wrote, “When I wrote my treatise (Principia Mathematica) about our system I had an eye upon such principles as might work with considering men for the belief of a Deity; and nothing can rejoice me more than to find it useful for that purpose.” According to Steven E. Jones, a professor emeritus of physics at Brigham Young University, Newton hoped his scientific writings would lead people to think about and believe in God. Jones argues that for the great scientist there was a natural meshing of science and belief in God.  

A religious person is insensitive to science or scientific inquiry is foreign to Indian thinking. When Madan Mohan Malaviya established Banaras Hindu University in 1916 on the day of Vasant Panchami, he had the vision that the new institute would promote scientific inquiry. He elaborated his vision in 1911: “The millions mired in poverty here can only get rid (of it) when science is used in their interest. Such maximum application of science is only possible when scientific knowledge is available to Indians in their own country.” One would come across Shri Vishwanath temple in the university campus. Banaras Hindu University was one of the best universities attracting bright minds, but later corruption and nepotism, and petty and party politics eroded its academic standards.

In universities in the USA and Europe, one would come across religious shrines within the campus. Top universities like Harvard, Yale and Oxford have churches. But that did not stop the university or its students to excel in diverse fields, and becoming world leaders.

True for the progress of a nation, the spirit of scientific inquiry is necessary. But it is naive to argue that to have scientific inquiry one must relinquish religious faith, or demolish or undermine religious institutions or achievements. Religion does not defy rationality. In order to establish institutions like Indian Institute of Technology or Indian Institute of Science or Defense Research and Development Organization, it is not necessary to break away from the old wisdom, or faith in God. One of the modern scientists in this context who comes to my mind is A. P. J. Abdul Kalam, who gave India’s defense a new direction. Kalam was reading Gita, while at the same time experimenting new technologies. Reading Gita, or going to temples, does not make an individual anti-scientific.

Do we, Indians, need more temples or hospitals? Hospitals, for sure. Do we need more schools or temples? Schools, for sure. Do we need more bridges or temples? Bridges, for sure. Our temples are our national heritage, and we need to protect them from erosion or destruction. They were architectural marvels, and they were also scientific marvels. As I was looking at the walls of the Meenakshi temple in Madurai during one of my trips, I wondered how could the masons build such a marvelous temple, without the aid of modern science and technology?

Mahatma Gandhi wrote in 1932: “If, on the one hand, hundreds of self-seeking men have misused mosques, temples and churches, on the other, millions have made good use of them. If you wish to test the truth of this statement, use your wonderful gift of imagination and suppose that a reformer razes to the ground in a single day all the churches, temples and mosques. Then picture to yourself the condition of those millions of simple good souls when they discover that the temples and mosques from which they daily derived consolation and support were no more. I see the truth of this every day.” Can we apply this Gandhian logic to thousands of religious places destroyed in India or elsewhere in the past?

What Kejriwal is arguing is not new. The Soviet socialist system ran on such a premise, and it collapsed. It emphasized a rigid divorce between science and religion and imposed a reign of terror on those who professed religion. While I have no problem with the philosophy of socialism and I truly believe that it has many good elements which states need to adopt, but the socialism of the Soviet type did not actually live up to the original promise. While aiming at establishing a higher brotherhood among the people, it, in fact, suffocated the inner fountains that supported this brotherhood. It discouraged individual enterprise and left everything to the totalitarian state. It discouraged religion but transformed itself into a new religion. So, in the Soviet Union, we had the communist party or the symbol, in place of the Orthodox Church, for the masses to worship. The question is not of science or religion. The question should be how to create an equilibrium between the two, the two supporting and strengthening each other instead of negating or suffocating each other.

The mindset is problematic. That if we have religion, there is no science and technology. And if we have science and technology, there is no place of religion. There was ample evidence that ancient India witnessed a synthesis of science and religion. Whether it was Aryabhatta or Brahmagupta, who were pioneers of scientific spirit, or Kautilya, who was an astute diplomat and theoretician of statecraft, or Kalidasa, the renowned poet and dramatist, all of them excelled in an eclectic atmosphere that promoted science and religion. Think of Taxila and Nalanda, the centers of learning, where not only debates concerning science and technology, but also concerning religion and spirituality were undertaken.

As I am writing about religion, let me elaborate on my conception of religion. My religion is not dogmatic, nor is it static. The principles that govern my religion are universal acceptance and toleration – the twin principles proudly proclaimed by Swami Vivekananda at the World Parliament of Religions in 1893. The Swami gave examples of sea-frog and well-frog and elaborated how the dogmatic religions, orthodox practices, see them in the fashion of the well-frog and declare them as the only truth, while a universal religion, like the ocean-frog, would see all religions as true. The hymn from Maha Upanishad embodies well the vision of the world as one family (Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam).

The following quote from Sri Aurobindo best summarizes the concept of universal acceptance: “Each religion has helped mankind. Paganism increased in man the light of beauty, the largeness and height of his life, his aim at a many-sided perfection; Christianity gave him some vision of divine love and charity; Buddhism has shown him a noble way to be wiser, gentler, purer; Judaism and Islam how to be religiously faithful in action and zealously devoted to God; Hinduism has opened to him the largest and profoundest spiritual possibilities. A great thing would be done if all these God-visions could embrace and cast themselves into each other; but intellectual dogma and cult-egoism stand in the way.”

One of the hymns of the Vedic times that best defines the Hindu ideal is:

ॐ पूर्णमदः पूर्णमिदं पूर्णात्पुर्णमुदच्यते

पूर्णस्य पूर्णमादाय पूर्णमेवावशिष्यते ॥

ॐ शान्तिः शान्तिः शान्तिः ॥

Aum Pūrnamadaḥ pūrnamidaṁ

Pūrnāt pūrnamudacyate

Pūrnasya pūrnamādāya

Pūrnamevāvaśiṣyate

Aum Śāntiḥ Śāntiḥ Śāntiḥ

It literally means: “That is full. This is full. The full is taken out of the full. Take out the full from the full, the full remains. Om, peace, peace, peace.” It implies: The Creator is both the ‘full’ and the parts that are also ‘full’, which are taken out of the ‘full’. By creating the universe and all the elements in it, the Creator does not limit Him or lose His ‘full’ness. This brings another element. As the whole world is the Creator’s creation out of Himself, the whole world and its elements partake His consciousness. Applying this logic further, we are all divine as we are created by the Supreme Divine. Ramakrishna Paramahansa was one of the foremost examples of this widest possible interpretation of religion. He practiced all religions including Christianity and Islam and concluded that all religions are true, and they all lead to true liberation. Mahatma Gandhi argued that all religions are like beautiful flowers in a garden. He further argued all religions are like rivers flowing to the same ocean, the Truth. Gandhi – a saint among politicians and politician among saints – attended morning prayers every day and listened to Narsinh Mehta and worked tirelessly to promote religious harmony and brotherhood.

Few lines from Narsinh Mehta, the 14^th century Gujarati saint and poet,

Vaishnav jana to tene kahiye, je pid parayi janere…

A person is truly divine, who understands the pain of others…

How can one better summarize the marriage between religion and science, between mandir and mathematics, than this song of Narsinh Mehta. An individual who is scientific can understand the true import of this song, and channelize her or his energy to the service of the others.

I think Arvind Kejriwal would not disagree with me on this interpretation of Hindu religion. My religion teaches the widest possible opening of the spirit, touching upon every aspect of human endeavor – whether it is science and technology, arts or commerce, or even politics. I think when politicians are soaked deep in this widest understanding of religion, I mean any religion, they will not quarrel regarding science and religion, rather an inner harmony will bind them and propel them to work in unison to address multiple crises including economic corruption, moral perversion and spiritual degeneration.  

Moralizing International Politics

This article makes an appeal to bridge the chasm between the practice of international politics and the universal moral principles. Violation of moral principles has emerged a norm than exception in international politics. States and global institutions have proved ineffective to checkmate violent conflicts and wanton killings as in Syria. It is not they are incapable or lack resources. The problem lies elsewhere. Ego is a major cause behind much of the hazards in international politics. The article problematizes ego and calls for a broader thinking in international politics. 

Ban Ki-moon, the former head of the United Nations, expressed the frustration of our age. He lamented: “It should shame us all…the suffering of the Syrian people continues to plumb new depths … The international community, and in particular the Security Council, cannot afford to waste any further time in ending the cycle of violence… it is time to find an exit from this madness” (The United Nations 2015). Syria provides a stark example before us how states and global institutions have proved ineffective to ensure international peace and security. Within a span of six years since the crisis erupted, more than 400,000 people lost lives and unaccountable others uprooted. The powerful states in the United Nations flexed muscles over means to realize peace. Peace remained elusive.

One of the factors that contribute to the ineffectiveness of the international community and its leaders is the technological-moral chasm. There has been rapid growth in technology, particularly the communication technology, but the thinking pattern has not witnessed parallel growth. The old primordial way of thinking has not changed. The archetypal thinking in terms of binaries – mine vs thine, us vs them, my group vs rival group – has not evolved over centuries though major changes appeared in the structure and organization of human living. This thinking has produced a paradox. In the midst of developed technology, globalization and discourses of a flat and borderless world, the states are engaged in re-bordering practices. Technology has been used to rigidify barriers – us vs them – through narrow visions of security. Both hard power and soft power are used to strengthen these binaries in thinking and practice.

Does seclusion/isolation help? Is an isolated state immune from insecurity beyond its borders? In this age of globalization, how would states ensure safety at home when there is violence outside? The global concerns such as terrorism, religious extremism and climate change transcend state borders. Isolation as a foreign policy strategy might have worked in the past, but in the contemporary world isolation implies invitation to more problems. A small happening in a small part of the globe can shape international developments. How would erecting barriers ensure security of one state while other states undergo violent crises? Does eerie calm imply peace? When minds are disturbed, security is fragile, peace is uneasy, when we have blatantly messed up with Nature, how would we ensure the survival of human race in the decades and centuries to come?

The states spend billions of dollars in building weapons, while vouching disarmament. States spent around 1686 billion US dollars on defense in 2016. Contrast this figure with another figure: from 2014 to 2016, about 795 million people in the world suffered from chronic undernourishment. Is it not a violation of human moral principle to invest billions in weapons to secure people and borders while people remain hungry?

Indian philosopher Sri Aurobindo argued, like individuals, states have egos– amplified through national habits, prejudices and idiosyncrasies (Sri Aurobindo 1962). When applied to international politics, they lead to jingoism, exploitation and wars, leading to practices like colonialism and imperialism. Colonialism and imperialism, one of the worst forms of exploitation, have ended. However, they were only manifestation of an exploitative substructure. The root, the ego, is intact, and its manifestation has acquired new shapes. The Indian philosopher argued that state ego could evolve when state leaders think in terms of larger human unity and harmony. The establishment of the United Nations, after the failure of the League of Nations, was hailed as a right step in this direction. The UN was established with a promise to ensure dignity and equality to all states. Has this happened?

If the ultimate goal of human life is peace and security, then the theories of international politics have not fared well. Grand theorizing might provide a big picture and offer plausible explanations of developments, but they largely fail to account small developments at small places with big implications. Should not theories suggest ways to address state egos and its various avatars? Explaining developments in retrospect maybe useful as it offers insights for future action, but unless there is an active agenda to realize global peace, the theories would be limiting in their usefulness. Social science theories, dealing with human beings and their behaviors, stand in contrast to physical science theories, which deal with matter, mostly insentient. The post-behavioralism trend in political science that emerged in late 1960s due to ‘deep dissatisfaction in political research and teaching’ called for ‘new strategies in science’. David Easton in his presidential address at American Political Science Association in 1969 called for “the development of new norm of behavior” as the post-behavioral trend “sees policy engagement as a social responsibility of the intellectual…” He further agued, “Someday it may also require the release of the social scientist from bondage to the unique needs and objectives of his own national political system” (Easton 1969, 1061). The trend, however, petered out quickly. Now is the time to revive this trend.

Some theories suggest that the world has become a better place to live since inter-state wars have declined. Are we living in a more secure and peaceful world? What about wars within communities and states and their international ramifications? How does one define conflict in Syria – intrastate, interstate or both, or a more dangerous face of traditional rivalries? Thousands of fault lines along regions, religions, races, ethnicities have emerged. Even the threat of interstate wars with a nuclear angle cannot be undermined. The present crisis can be compared to a can of worms, with worms – multiple conflicts at various levels – continuously crawl out, in all shapes, sizes and colors and challenge individuals and states alike.

The dilemma over pleasure, happiness and peace was well depicted in the life of the Greek philosopher Diogenes. The philosopher asked the Emperor Alexander, who offered him all comforts of life, not to block sun light and that was all what he needed from him. With a lantern in his hand, Diogenes searched for an honest man. This act may defy rational understanding, but it contains a deeper message, which can help salvage humanity from the multiple crises. Pretensions, subterfuges, and other instruments meant for tangential gains bring hazards in its trail and harm the perpetrator. Gandhi’s caution rings true: “For one man cannot do right in one department of life whilst he is occupied in doing wrong in any other department. Life is one indivisible whole” (Gandhi 1969, 571).

A report titled, “Welcome to Miami, Massachusetts” claimed that if the greenhouse gas emission continues at the current rate, “… by 2100 Boston’s average summer-high temperatures will likely be more than 10 degrees Fahrenheit hotter than they are now, ‘making it feel as steamy as North Miami Beach is today’” (Annear 2014). A large iceberg of the size of Delaware broke off from an ice shelf in Antarctica in July 2017. According to a report, “global warming has pushed temperatures up to 5 degrees higher in the region since the 1950s and could increase up to 7 degrees more by the end of the century, putting more stress on the ice” (Rice 2017). Tony de Brum, the former Marshall Islands Foreign Minister, nominated for Nobel Peace Prize for his role in Paris Climate agreement, died recently at the age of 72. Brum witnessed the ‘Bravo shot,’ the thermonuclear test at Bikini Atoll when he was 9 years old. He became a champion of nuclear disarmament and environment protection. Brum, whose island home went under waters due to rising ocean, argued, “The thought of evacuation is repulsive to us…We think that the more reasonable thing to do is to seek to end this madness, this climate madness, where people think that smaller, vulnerable countries are expendable and therefore they can continue to do business as usual” (The Guardian 2017). Gandhi’s ‘Nature has for everyone’s need but not for everyone’s greed’ provides a powerful message. Unless the very basic thinking of states and their leaders change, it will be difficult to moralize international politics.

Plato devised a scheme of governance in which the king, the modern equivalent of president/prime minister, must be a philosopher. The king must undergo decades of education to govern the state. The king and his class must rise above the notions of mine and thine, live a communal life, eat in common kitchen, transcend boundaries of family and group, and become free to dedicate his life to state. Applying the Platonic yardstick to modern day kings, leaders of modern states, may appear farfetched, but it provides a vision how a leader should govern a state.

For moralizing international politics, one state does not have to dominate or be dominated. Morality requires collective conscience and action. The states, through their leaders, need to develop an integral moral psychology that informs social, economic and political worlds as they interact and shape each other. Powerful states may provide leadership in this direction.

References:

Annear, Steve (2014) Welcome to Miami, Massachusetts. Boston Daily, July 11, http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/blog/2014/07/11/climate-central-map-heat-boston-miami/, accessed 4 July 2017.

Easton, David (1969) The New Revolution in Political Science. The American Political Science Review; 63 (4):1051-1061.

Gandhi, Mahatma (1969) The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi Vol. 32. New Delhi: The Publications Division, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India.

Rice, Doyle (2017) Massive iceberg nearly the size of Delaware breaks off Antarctica. USA Today, 12 July, https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/sciencefair/2017/07/12/massive-iceberg-breaks-off-antarctica/102637874/, accessed 4 July 2017.

Sri Aurobindo (1962) Human Cycle, the Ideal of Human Unity, War and Self-Determination. Pondicherry: Sri Aurobindo Ashram.

The Guardian (2017) Tony de Brum, champion of Paris climate agreement, dies aged 72, 23 August, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/aug/23/tony-de-brum-champion-of-paris-climate-agreement-dies-aged-72, accessed 24 August 2017.

The United Nations (2015) Statement by the Secretary-General on the Third Anniversary of the Geneva Communique on Syria. 30 June, http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2015/06/30/world/middleeast/ap-un-united-nations-syria.html, accessed 5 August 2017.

(This article was earlier published in Transcend Media Weekly: https://www.transcend.org/tms/2017/12/moralizing-international-politics/)

Jagannath Culture and Peace

Philosopher and Yogi, Sri Aurobindo, wrote in his essay ‘The Chariot of Jagannath,’ “The ideal society is the vehicle of the indwelling Godhead of a human aggregate, the chariot for the journey of Jagannath. Unity, Freedom, Knowledge and Power constitute the four wheels of this chariot.”

The conception of an ideal society has captivated minds of sages and philosophers throughout the ages. Whether the Upanishad’s exhortation ‘Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam’, or the Jaina concept of ‘Anekantavada,’ or the Buddhist ideal of the ‘Middle Path’, or the Christian commandment ‘Love Thy Neighbor’, the religions and the wise throughout the ages have sung the song of love and peace.

Who does not want peace? Who does not want a peaceful life, without violence and suffering? But, is there peace? Perhaps the world has never been as violent as today. Within a span of six years, from 2011 to 2016, more than four hundred thousand people perished in Syria alone, forget other conflicts scattered across the globe. Death, displacement, refugee crisis, seem to be the order of the day. The menaces of religious extremism and terrorism, aggressive pursuit of interests, excessive materialism and negligence of spiritualism, have contributed to the moral depravity of our age.

When I talk about peace, I do not mean an uneven peace – a peace of the strong over the weak, or a peace enforced by power of bayonets, or a peace in which we have material comforts at its peak, but moral and spiritual depravity at nadir. I am taking about a peace in which there is no violence from within or without, a peace that no circumstances can disturb, a peace established within but reflected without, outside in our daily behavior – in our thought and action.

How does Jagannath come in to the picture when we talk about peace? What does the Lord and his chariot signify? Jagannath or His chariot are not mere wooden instruments to be venerated; they possess tremendous meaning for all of us and for the world. They hold the key to address our moral depravity and our spiritual bankruptcy.

Jagannath, literally meaning Lord of Universe, is in true sense the Universal God, who transcends all divisions, and embraces all, whether the sinner or the virtuous. The pervasiveness of Jagannath consciousness can only be felt when one rises to the occasion, and leaving aside the ego, merges himself with the divine. Mere rituals do not help, unless they positively impact our mind, our consciousness. How many of us can echo Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu?  The devotee sang in his Sri Jagannathāṣṭakam:

“na vai yāce rājyaṁ na ca kanaka-māṇikya-vibhavaṁ

na yāce 'haṁ ramyāṁ sakala jana-kāmyāṁ vara-vadhūm

sadā kāle kāle pramatha-patinā gīta-carito

jagannāthaḥ svāmī nayana-patha-gāmī bhavatu me.

I do not pray to Jagannath for a kingdom, nor for gold, jewels, wealth, or even for a beautiful wife as desired by all men. My only prayer is that Sri Jagannath-deva, whose splendid glories are always sung by Shiva, be the constant object of my vision.

hara tvaṁ saṁsāraṁ druta-taram asāraṁ sura-pate

hara tvaṁ pāpānāṁ vitatiṁ aparāṁ yādava-pate

aho dīne 'nāthe nihita-caraṇo niścitam idaṁ

jagannāthaḥ svāmī nayana-patha-gāmī bhavatu me.

O master of the gods! Quickly deliver me from this worthless worldly existence. O Lord of the Yadus! Purge me of my limitless host of sins. Aho! You have promised to bestow Your feet upon the fallen and shelter less -- O Jagannath Swami, please be the object of my vision.”

I understand the concern of ‘roti, kapda aur makan.’ We need a healthy body and a healthy mind to engage in mundane as well noble activities. But, how much do we need? Mahatma Gandhi’s famous saying comes to mind: Nature has enough for everybody’s need, but not for everybody’s greed. We all aspire for peace, but we are not peaceful. We want the world to be peaceful, with no conflict in family, in society and in the world, but it does not happen. What is the reason? The reason we have to find within us. Alexander the Great while dying in Mesopotamia (modern day Iraq) ordered his men to put around him the wealth from the conquests, and told them, ‘Lo, I earned so much, but I am not taking anything with me.’ He was influenced by monks while returning from India. The monks inspired him to ponder over mortality of human life and vainglory. Flashing back to the 20th century English film ‘Death Becomes Her’, the protagonist refused to drink potion to become immortal, and argued that it is our work, our action here on the earth that makes us immortal.

Though Jagannath is considered a part of Hindu pantheon, He transcends religions or other social constructs. As Sri Aurobindo argued, Jagannath is the ‘Universal Godhead’, and the four wheels of the chariot represent ‘unity, freedom, knowledge and power’. Stories abound how the Supreme God embraced the fallen, the poor, the diseased, seekers belonging to diverse faiths. Whosoever seeks Him with all sincerity, He manifests. Whether it is Salabeg or Dasia Bauri or Bandhu Mohanty, Jagannath bestowed His grace on them. Do we call Jagannath in the spirit of these seekers, who ‘owned’ nothing, but Lord Jagannath?

What then is the major obstacle? The major obstacle is ego and its offshoots. I, Me, Mine – are useful instruments, but at some point they become obstacles to spiritual progress and to the building of an ideal human society. To quote the prophetic message of Sri Aurobindo in the essay quoted above, “But so long as the chariot of Jagannath is not built, the ideal society will also not take shape. That is the ideal and ultimate image, the manifestation of the highest and profoundest truth. Impelled by the Universal Godhead, the human race is striving to create it, but owing to the ignorance of Prakriti it only succeeds in creating a different image either deformed, crude and ugly or, if tolerably fair, incomplete in spite of its beauty.”

Sri Aurobindo pointed out that the human society is ‘striving’ to create an ideal human society, but ‘owing to ignorance’ it cannot realize the ideal. Ego is a reflection of this ignorance. While individual ego goads an individual to see and visualize everything through the narrow boundaries of I, me and mine, the collective ego – the aggregate ego of individuals living in a society or state – goads the leaders to aggressively pursuit national interest, leading to jingoism and war. The two world wars were mainly outcomes of the battles of the collective egos. May Lord Jagannath enlighten us, and save us from a Third World War with a nuclear catastrophe and with possible extinction of human race. Albert Einstein had said that if human race survives a Third World War, the Fourth World War will be fought with stones and sticks.

There is a light within us which impels us to rise beyond our individual and collective egos, and think of the world as one family, ‘Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam.’ Lord Jagannath has provided us the way. It is time to follow it with all sincerity.

Let the Rath Yatra at Tampa in 2017 be a real Yatra – a collective march, and a collective promise to walk together, to work together, to establish an ideal human society, based on twin principles of love and harmony. It is time for action!

This article was written for the event of Jagannath Rath Yatra at Tampa, Florida, on 25 June 2017.

International Yoga Day: Some Reflections

The Yoga lovers all over the world celebrated International Yoga Day today. I participated in a Yoga event in Boston, organized by an India-based organization. The participants came from different communities. I will focus more on this particular event later.

Last year, the UN declared 21 June as International Yoga Day. The Yoga lovers all over the world rejoiced at the UN declaration.

Let me briefly analyze what I understand by the term Yoga. The term has two aspects: narrow and broad. This is a simplistic categorization as I know Yoga is a much more deep term. A person with Yogic bent of mind, or rather a person who is true Yogi, can better define Yoga. In the narrow sense, as understood by most people, Yoga is equivalent to Asanas and similar body exercises that are reinvigorating. Asanas are different from body exercises in gym such as lifting weights or rising high on bars. Asanas usually do not need props. One can do it on an open space; one does not need to go to gym. The point is, for Asana, there are no special requirements. One should have a healthy body - that is most important requirement. I would say it is the cheapest, and at the same time priceless, exercise that keeps body and mind active and peaceful. The healing power of Asana is indeed great. One of the pioneers of Yoga in India, B. K. S. Iyengar who as a young boy had been suffering from diseases cured himself by practicing Asanas. World wide, there are various Yoga centers by enterprising professionals, who try to innovate and add one or two new techniques to make it popular, and earn good money.

Yoga developed in ancient India. The founder of Yoga was Patanjali. It is difficult to exactly trace his time period, but it would be fair to say that Patanjali was before Chirst, perhaps much before Christ. His book, Yoga Sutra is considered one of the major books on Yoga. One of my friends gifted me this book, when I was a college student in India. I read the hymns and tried to fathom their depth, but it was difficult for me that time to understand them.

Patanjali’s definition of Yoga is indeed a broad one. He says, “Yoga chitta vritti nirodha”. The literal meaning of the hymn is: to control the movements of mind is Yoga. This definition may seem too simplistic for the uninitiated, but too profound who understand the true import of Yoga. This definition has parallels with Gita’s hymn: “karmenye vadhikaraste maa phaleshu kadachana”, and “sthitaprajna”. In the hymn, Lord Krishna says to Arjuna, who was bewildered to see cousins on the rival side, “you have right to perform actions, but not to fruits of actions”. Sthitaprajna implies a state of mind – a composure in which the Yogi, the practitioner of Yoga, adopts same posture at good news and bad news, at success and at failure. This is certainly a broad definition as it does not talk about Asana or Pranayam (control of breathing for particular effects) or meditation (concentration of mind on divine or divine thoughts and words or on a particular point). Yoga includes all, and goes further. 

Yoga literally means addition or joining of one thing with some other thing. The spiritual connotation of the term is the joining of the individual soul with the universal soul. To put in a different language, it implies the joining of the individual soul with God. Even if we take out the religious interpretation, the term has profound secular meaning. It is by practicing Yoga the individual can widen his or her narrow self, and think broad and universal. Yoga can elevate an individual, whether religious or not, from his or her narrow selfish cocoon to the universal platform. One does not necessarily need to be religious to practice Yoga, whether in the form of Asana or Pranayam or meditation. Yoga is scientific and one can see its result after practicing.

One can know the value of Yoga only by practicing it, not by preaching it. Yoga is certainly an instrument of practice. A person who practices Yoga everyday would be jealous enough to give it up at the insistence of a misguided one who declares it an instrument of a particular religion.

In Hindu tradition, there are many types of Yoga. Yoga in this religious tradition is a means to realize God. In Hindu religion, there are six kinds of Yoga: Jnana Yoga, Bhakti Yoga, Prema Yoga, Karma Yoga, Raj Yoga and Tantra Yoga. In short: Jnana Yoga emphasizes on the means of knowledge and wisdom to realize God. Adi Shankara was one of its key proponents. Bhakti Yoga emphasizes on devotion to realize God. Sri Chaitanya was one of its key proponents. Prema Yoga emphasizes on love to realize God. Mira bai was one of its key proponents. Karma Yoga emphasizes on work as a key means to realize God. Gandhi was one of its key proponents. Raj Yoga emphasizes on Pranayam towards realizing God. Swami Vivekananda on his book Raj Yoga elaborated this Yoga. Tantra Yoga emphasizes on occult practices to realize God. Gorakhnath was one of its key proponents. Sri Aurobindo says it is not necessary that one must practice a particular Yoga or all Yogas to realize God. He suggests one should practice any of these Yogas, or a combination of them that suits a his or her aptitude and constitution.

Sri Aurobindo’s definition of Yoga is: All Life is Yoga. Perhaps this is the broadest definition of Yoga. It seems confusing. How can all life be Yoga? When I was a student at a university in New Delhi, I had a debate with one of my friends on this issue. My friend said: how can it be possible that Yoga will be the guiding principle of life? How can whole life be Yoga? It can not be. We have to do so many things – we have to study, watch TV, have some fun, and also Yoga. So, Yoga is one part of our life activities, not all activities. His argument apparently contradicted Sri Aurobindo’s definition. As a person he has every right to cling to his argument.

A person who has understood Sri Aurobindo’s philosophy understands the true import of his definition. In fact, this definition summarizes his whole philosophy. All Life is Yoga. He simplifies: the human life follows a path of evolution, human being moves towards God, and if not today then tomorrow he will reach God. This is certain, he says. And a person who understands this, and realizes this that he or she is born on earth to realize God, he or she would then adopt a Yogic perspective on life. Whatever he or she does, she would do that from that consciousness. That consciousness entails: I am here on earth to realize God, earth is the playground chosen by God for me, God is the guide, and everything that I do, I do for God. I am studying – I am studying for God. I am playing football – I am playing for God. I am dancing – I am dancing for God. Sri Aurobindo would say when one adopts this approach to life and actions – for him all his or her life, all his actions, will be Yoga. He would grow towards God, and his consciousness becomes God-consciousness. It is a difficult process as there is almost an eternal pull of base elements to obstruct this growth of human being towards God. Hence, Sri Aurobindo says doing Yoga is like walking on the edge of a sword.

We conventionally understand Yoga as doing Asana or Pranayam or meditation. And the International Yoga Day is intended to celebrate and promote these practices, which are enormously helpful for body, vital and mind.

Some people oppose Yoga. I came across a blog, which says that in India there are millions of people who do not get two good meals a day, so what is the fun of doing Yoga or promoting it? His concern for the poor is justified, and I hope the concern is genuine. But, he fails to explain how doing Yoga increases poverty, or contributes to poverty in India. These two issues are unrelated. Did the government of India divert millions or billions of dollars from welfare activities such as poverty eradication to Yoga? If yes, then he has a point. If not, then he is making an argument, when there is actually no argument.

Some people object practicing Yoga and term it religious, particularly Hindu. It is like saying flying in an aeroplane is Christian as Wright brothers made it. This objection simply does not stand rational scrutiny.

If we apply a sheer utilitarian measure (Bentham’s theory that pleasure can be quantified), Yoga is utilitarian. It makes the functioning of the body better, or even corrects/heals some of its malfunctioning. It brings calm and peace to our mind. If done properly, Pranayam and meditation increase mental power. What is the cost? Almost nothing, if you are not going to a professional Yoga teacher. Where is religion here?

I liked the event today. There was a discourse on Yoga. The speaker told about Yoga, and its various advantages. There was group meditation with soothing music in the background that continued for about one hour. At the end of the event, the organizers offered sweets and a card with a good message. One of the organizers asked me: how was the event, did I like it, or do I practice Yoga differently? I replied, the event was good, but I was expecting the meditation would be shorter than one hour. I know how it is difficult to meditate for one hour at one stretch. Few participants were dismayed as they came with their mats for doing some guided Asanas, which did not happen.

In Search of Cultural Roots

Early this month I attended a cultural event at Chelmsford, Massachusetts. The festival was organized by Odisha Society of New England (OSNE). OSNE is a cultural group of Odia people, who originated from India’s eastern state of Odisha, in New England region of USA. It started functioning in 1983 in Boston. It is part of the larger Odisha Society of America, the body representing Odias all over USA.

I am an Odia, but I am not parochial. One can come cross parochial people in parts of India, who are closed to other cultures and ideas, and protest migration of people from other areas as they are afraid of losing job and other opportunities. This parochial mentality prevails not only in India, but also in many other countries. I do not bracket myself in this category. I am an Odia, and at the same time an Indian. Both these identities do not contradict each other. Rather my larger Indian identity embraces my Odia identity. When I rise higher, I consider myself not only as an Indian, but also a member of the globe, a global citizen. To put in a different way, there are diverse identities of one person, and they are not necessarily contradictory. In one direction, this identity may start with oneself identifying with his or her village or town, then expanding to province, country and even the world. Drawing from Sri Aurobindo’s philosophy, I am a human being, and my identity does not stop at my village or closed community as it expands further towards an ideal human unity encompassing whole world. Hence, when I say I am proud to be an Odia – this does not contradict or undermine my other identities.

I got an email from OSNE that there is a regional drama festival organized in the first week of June 2015. I was prevaricating as to whether I should attend the event or not as the place was far from my place, and I did not have a suitable transport system to reach the place. But when I talked to the association president, an energetic and affable person, he suggested that I should come and enjoy the event. He offered to arrange my travel after I use public transport to a certain point. From the red line Savin Hill train stop I took train to Alewife, and from there I took a bus to Burlington Mall. The president picked me up from there in his car, and drove around 15 to 20 minutes to reach the festival venue. When I reached the event, the key members of the association were busy arranging various items for the event. I tried to help them. One lady told me to bring a small table from the outside of the auditorium to the dais. She placed on it a beautiful wooden statue of Lord Jagannath. I was very happy to see the statue. I would not dwell here about Lord Jagannath as one can come across huge material in Internet. Lord Jagannath is the reigning deity of Odisha, and every Odia prays Him. Puri, the city where the Jagannath temple is located, is considered one among the four holiest places for the Hindus. In Odisha, I have seen people remembering the Lord before starting any new venture. I have also seen people touching the ground and uttering His name before embarking on any journey.

Before the program started at 4 PM, there were refreshments. I could see the number of Odias swelling as the time moved ahead. I interacted with some of the kids, who came with their parents to participate in the event and/or enjoy the event. While enjoying the delicious refreshments – particularly the chat and masala – I started chatting with two young boys. I asked them what they wanted to be in future, what are their career goals, etc. One of them – the elder one – said that he wants to be a mathematician. I asked whether he knows Srinivasa Ramanujan, the mathematics legend from India, he replied yes. The other boy replied he does not know what he wants to be. I interacted with some other Odias.

There were very few known faces; hence I was almost a stranger. But I could develop quick rapport with some Odias and started chatting with them. I started talking to a couple, siting next to me. Their daughter participated in the program. I asked the lady whether she misses Odisha. She replied, ‘there is no time to miss Odisha. The life is so busy here – taking care of daughter, managing family and job – all these leave no time to think about other things, including Odisha’. Perhaps that was a true confession. The people are so busy here that they do not have time to devote to other things. But, I took solace in thinking that despite their busy schedules they could organize this event, and prepare their kids to participate in the event, and devote time and energy for it, and this is not a small thing. That itself shows that their hearts and minds are embedded in the Odia culture.

I found the programs that night not only entertaining but also educative. The Odissi and Sambalpuri dances I watched after a long time. I liked the children’s drama Hari Darshana, literally meaning the sight of Hari (the Hindu God, considered to be one among the supreme trinity in Hindu pantheon – Brahma, Vishnu, also known as Hari, and Brahma). The theme of the story is this: the son of demon king Hirankashyapu, Prahlada did not relent in praying Lord Vishnu, despite pressure and ploys to kill him. Finally, the Lord emerges from a pillar as a testimony of faith of Prahlada and kills the king. The morale of the story: a true devotion to God can save from pitfalls. I also liked the dramas – Gopal 60, Muktidana and Elo Elo Mo Boulo. All of them drew from Odia narratives. In Muktidana, a girl fights against patriarchal system; in Gopal 60, three friends search and find their father-figure and mentor; and Elo Elo Mo Boulo reflects a deeper sense of humanity in a member from LGBT community. Some other programs like Bollywood dance, band and karaoke were equally heart-touching.

The message I came across was that despite being far from their native place, the Odia people love their culture, and work hard to retain their cultural memory in their daily lives. The organization of such events reflected this. The first generation Odias are strongly rooted in their culture, and are eager to impart it to their children. While I was watching the children’s drama, I could see many of them born and brought up here speaking native Odia. Only few of them had Americanized Odia. I commend the efforts of the first generation Odias who work hard to retain their culture roots, and impart the culture to the next generation. I also commend the efforts of the second generation Odias, who are American citizens by birth, to learn their parents’ language and culture. As I mentioned in the beginning, different cultures and different identities can survive, or rather prosper together, in same person. Hence, for me it is an amazing experience to see how these children navigate through their American identity and Odia identity, and how they are reconciling these two identities.

After the cultural program, we had a lavish dinner. It was a good experience to see so many people, about 150, from the same community. One Odia professor who teaches at a university in Boston gave me and another Odia ride back to our homes. We had a lively discussion in her car. The professor lamented that some Odias prefer to speak in English  with another Odia even though they know Odia language very well. She was not against the English language, and we all agreed that English is a necessary language, and is considered a global lingua franca, but when one is comfortable in his native tongue, why not use that? When I reached my home, it was late night. I was still relishing the cultural event and reflecting on Odia culture and language, but my eyelids were heavy and soon I fell asleep.

On the New Year

It may seem odd to write something on the New Year when the year is shedding one of its twelve legs. I understand that this perspective applies to the English new year, as there are many other new years which are yet to come – the Chinese celebrate it on 5th of February, the Hindus some time in March, etc. In that sense all these celebrations, if I may say, fall into a cycle – the cycle of new years or what I call the cycle of life. 

When I am talking about life, my mind goes to the saying of one of India’s celebrated philosopher, social servant and freedom fighter – Gopabandhu Dash. Dash (1877-1928) was fiercely independent in mind and spirit and despite having university degrees in those days and having opportunities to enjoy the life of high class preferred to be a dhoti-clad social reformer going from door to door to serve the poor. When the devastating flood affected the coastal Orissa Dash came out of his house to distribute relief to the victims. At that time his only son was bedridden with serious illness (those days medical facilities were horrible). His wife requested Dash not to leave their sick son on the verge of death, to which he replied (and I paraphrase), ‘thousands of my sons are afflicted by flood – whom should I serve: to this son or those thousands of sons suffering outside home?’ Gopabandhu left for serving the victims, and his son died. 

This is a brief background of Gopabandhu’s life – I have no intention to go into detail of his life, which is available in internet. I want to quote his message, which is quite apt for the New Year. Dash wrote in his poetic style, manav jeevan nuhain kevala barsha masa dina danda, karme jien nara karma eka tara jeevanara manadanda. To translate: the human life (and its worth) can not be measured by years, months or moments (which he lives), but only by the work (used broadly service to society) because human life can only be measured by the work he has done when alive. Dash not only wrote this but also walked his writing. I had already given one example. There are thousand such examples in his life. In the Gandhian language – his life was his message. He lived his philosophy. 

By bringing Gopabandhu to life on the occasion of the New Year I intend to do one thing – to remind myself and to my friends who read this – to think how far can we think and act in his way? How do we live our life worthy of a vision which we cherish – and which our successors will proudly remember and say that this person lived a worthy life – the life of a Gandhi, or Gopabandhu or Mandela or King Jr, or Newton, Einstein, or Wittgenstein – the examples are numerous. We may not want to be one of these worthy offsprings of the world, but we can be creative, productive, and humble in our own way. To argue in a lighter way, I bring here the famous song acted by Raj Kapoor, ek din bik jayega mati ke mol jag mein rah jayenge pyare teri bol, duje ke hontho ko dekar apne geet koi nisani chhod phir duniya se bol…(roughly translated - one day this fragile body will melt away (meaning death), but your actions will stay. Share others’ joy and pain, and in that do something for the world). Another song, acted by Kapoor, kisi ki muskurahaton pe ho nisar kisika dard mil sake to le udhar, kisiki vaste ho tere dil mein pyar jina isika naam hai bears similar message. Come here Swami Vivekananda who mightily pronounces: as you are born a human – leave an indelible mark on earth. 

I am reminded here the English film Death Has Become Her, which I watched few years ago. In that movie one of the protagonists Ernest denounces a magic potion, a drink of which makes human being immortal. There is a famous dialogue – Ernest to the prodding to drink the potion says I do not want to live artificially; rather I would live my life and die. These are not the exact words but something like which he said to his opponents. This is like Socratic way of saying (when the Greek philosopher Socrates was administered hemlock to die without his fault) – by dying I will remain alive and this jury will die while alive. There are many hilarious moments in the movie. (If I remember correctly) one of the women who had drunk potion met an accident and her body became scattered, she then collected her body into one. A movie full of comedies but with messages.

This is in brief my New Year reflections. I do not recommend that everybody must follow the example of Gopabandhu ditto – that is not the message. It is also not possible. The idea is to follow the spirit that guided Gopabandhu or Gandhi or Newton. If we can follow their examples in our own way and remain active, vigilant with seriousness to our work and surrounding and with compassion towards all, we can reasonably say that we can effect something positive in our life as well as for the world. I strongly reject the spirit of fatalism or a lazy attitude to life and in believing that a superior power will do everything for us – that is something I call negativism. Also, God does not help them who do not know how to help them. 

When I look at India, the place of my birth, I find (using the language of biology) malnutrition of these great spirits and surfeit of evil spirits – in terms of corruption and corrupt leaders, crime, religious orthodoxy, class and caste antagonisms. Field a few of Gandhis, Gopabandhus and Vivekanandas – all these problems and problem makers will vanish. There are attempts in this direction in recent months. We need more vigorous attempts. I am optimistic and positive about India’s future. Did not the great philosopher Sri Aurobindo proclaim during his message on the eve of India’s Independence that India is destined to be the Guru (leader) of the world? That leadership is the spiritual leadership, not a leadership backed by gun.

When I write these things on the New Year I may appear to lecture or give sermons – I actually look at things in a different way. These are messages to me as well. Human beings need guides like Gandhi but Gandhi can not lead human beings unless the human being wills to be led or to be changed. What I mean is: social transformation or change in the world is a collective effort, in which all, including I, have acts to perform.

Dying the 'Religion' Way?

Last month more than 100 people died in a stampede in the Indian state of Madhya Pradesh. The dead when alive were devotees. They went to the Ratangarh temple on the occasion of the Durga Puja, one of the important Hindu festivals. The dead mostly included women, children and old men. 30 children died. Seven years ago stampede had taken place in the same place, but no lessons were drawn.

It does not need any hard evidence to point out that most of the people who died were poor. For thousands of devotees, there were only one sub-inspector and nine constables to maintain law and order. The top officials of the district were busy in elections, or were simply careless. Had the Chief Minister of the state, forget Chief Minister, had a senior bureaucrat of the state been visiting the temple, the law and order could have been better maintained, perhaps the stampede could have been avoided. Perhaps religious festivals should be graced by the so called elite people so that lives of the poor people could be saved!! 

I am particularly sad for the children who died. Perhaps they could have preferred to play in their house yards than visiting temples where most of them could little understand what is going on. These children died, and with them a portion of future India is lost. The tradition of visiting temples on religious occasions might be a good thing as it might bring solace to mind and heart, but if stampede and death would be the consequence then I would prefer to worship my God in my house than visiting to a temple and get killed. I remember reading news that one family who went to a religious place to celebrate the birthday of their only son lost all lives in a road accident on return. Perhaps we need better roads, better law and order, and better discipline before visiting temples and offering prayers. 

The excessive reliance on tradition may not be always helpful. There needs to be a distinction between superstition and tradition. As I interpret theology, God does not demand that one must go to temple to reach Him. There is God in human being and when the human being realizes God in him and identifies him with Him, then there is realization of God and liberation, for that it is not necessary to go to temple. Swami Vivekananda, one of the great religious and social reformers of India, argued that it is better to play football than to read Gita. He was at remorse at the poverty of India, the malnutrition affecting her children. He argued, with which I agree, that without a healthy body and mind, an individual can not be true follower of God. An emaciated body will devote most time thinking about food than God. And a corrupt mind can never lead us to God even if we sit and stand 24/7 before the statue of God in the most famous temple. 

Marx is right when he argued religion is the opium of the masses. It teaches subservience and fatalism. I know that this is a negative aspect of religion. In its positive aspect, religion has many utilities both for peace of mind and for spiritual progress. Let me talk about this negative dimension. Fatalism induces in the recalcitrant a sense of apathy towards affairs of life as he believes that the God will do everything for him. This enabled the colonial powers to easily dominate the God-believing people as fatalism induces in them the belief that it is what God wants. I read somewhere that when Abdali attacked India, he had an easy run in some places in killing people as many of them under the spell of the Bhakti movement did not counter the attack. If that is religion, then I would better disavow it. 

A religion devoid of courage, vigor, devoid of life and dynamism, devoid of progress and adaptation, is no religion as such but a dying creed. At least that is not Hinduism. Perhaps decay has gripped the religion. Particularly in the context of Hindu religion, there are no stalwarts in the image of Shankara or Ramanuja or Swami Vivekananda or Sri Aurobindo who can guide the practitioners of the religion. Now-a-days in India we have a lot of talk about religion, but not for internal illumination but external embellishment. It is no surprise that the so called God-men and God-women are morally corrupt. External preaching without internal purity has almost created a miasma over the true tenets of the religion. The old ritual persists but the spirit has seemed to evaporate.

I am not at all amused with the death of the innocent on the bridge over the Sindh river last month. Though the religion occasion coincided with my birthday, I felt helpless as on such an occasion I heard people dying. Goddess Durga, whose temple the pilgrims thronged must have not desired such a scene. Though it would be both futile and irrational to study the mind of the Goddess, but if we apply the human reasoning it would be appropriate to say that the Goddess, whom we worship as mother, must not rejoice at the death of her children.

The basic tenet of Hindu religion is perhaps best captured by the 15th century Gujarati philosopher, Narsinh Mehta, who sang, ‘the devotee is he who understands and cares for other’s pain’ (Vaishnava Jana to tene kahiye jo pir parai jaane re). If service is one pillar, then sacrifice is certainly the other. But service and sacrifice demand courage and preparedness. A person who is filled with vices can neither perform service nor sacrifice. And the vices can be individual as well as collective. When a religion is gripped by the vices with majority of the practitioners believing that religion is just a ritual, and nothing more, then there is no end to perdition not after this life but in this life.

Some people believe that if a person dies on an auspicious religion occasion, then he directly goes to heaven. Perhaps this belief persists in other religions. I strongly disapprove such a belief. Such a belief justifies all kinds of death on these occasions, including the stampede that took place in Madhya Pradesh last month. I would rather let the people stay at home and pray from there rather than letting them to become victims of a poorly organized festival, irresponsible administration, and deadly rumors.

Living Reality of God

When I use the phrase living reality of God, I use it in a very conventional sense. I use it in the sense a common person will prefer to use it. Hence, one does not need specialization in theology or philosophy to comprehend what I mean to say here. It is simple, related to the common sense notion of God. Further extending my assumption, I argue that most of the human beings believe in God; only few are atheists or agnostics. Here, I am emphasizing on this majority God-believing people and drawing their attention to the discourse here. On basis of conjecture, I argue that among the seven billion people the earth tolerates now, at least six billion people believe in God. Whether you are a Christian or a Hindu or a Muslim, or belong to any other religion, I am not alluding to that- my major point is that most of we humans believe in God (I am afraid whether we could attribute gender to God, particularly when we talk about God as infinite, formless and shapeless). We believe God is three omnis (-potent, -scient, -present), magnanimous, kind and embodiment of all perfections.

We adorn our houses with beautiful images or symbols representing God, we pray every morning and evening, or any other time. A devout Muslim says Namaz at least five times a day, a Christian goes to Church to pray God, a Hindu goes to a temple to offer prayers. In all these actions, I identify an underlying motive of good, we pray – O’ God give us strength, give us wisdom, give us wealth, and all other kinds of endowments which any human being may desire in his life for a dignified living. I do not dispute it, and do not quarrel on this attitude. This, in a range a God prayers, may be rated one rung, there are many other prayers – for instance a saint may ask for salvation instead of wealth, a wealthy person may ask for solace and peace of mind, and so on. The basic point I am trying to underline is we believe God is the giver, and we are the receiver. God is good, and we can ‘earn’ and ‘learn’ from God.

That is fine, and that in a sense fortifies human belief in a higher power, which is beyond our grasp. I will not debate here various implications of such a belief, but certainly I will debate the human individual the center of attention-seeker and seeker of things from God, and the contrast between his prayer and his ideas while praying, and what actually he does. I emphasize on the term contrast, because this contrasting nature of human personality is the issue of core debate. And the contrast is so glaring, so naked, that it appears that the whole human cycle since ancient days is just a continuum in repeating this contrast, without any actual transformation or change in this cycle. I will elaborate this point.

Let me simplify this by alluding to simple instances in our daily lives. We pray– O’ God make us peaceful. But after we finish the prayer, we get angry at instances which do not warrant anger, or which can be subdued or controlled, and the prayer goes to oblivion. This prayer does not take place one day, but for months and years. We pray something, we vow before God to do something, but aftermath we just do the opposite. We know how many people take oath before God that they will never do evil things, but actually they perpetrate all those evil things. We might laugh at the situation in the law courts. The witness touches Gita or Koran or Bible (the religious scriptures believed to have directly flown from the mouth of God) and takes oath that he will not lie while answering to the lawyer, but he knows he is there just to tell lies. I am not generalizing the issue, but it happens in many cases. This is another case of striking contrast. There are thousands of such contrasts in human lives, which make human person most paradoxical, most contrasting. 

Why then this contrast? Is it essential? Is it inevitable? I offer this psychological explanation for this contrast. Human beings are fragile and at the same time shrewd, and also at the same time he knows that he needs a veneer of good-nature knowing well that he cannot be that. This thinking pervades not one human being, but all human beings; as a consequence this contrast has been accepted as a normal order in human society. Putting it figuratively, it is not one or two, but all are naked in this public bath, hence it is considered neither immoral, nor anti-God, but it is just Normal. Rather it is encouraged so that at least such a practice can provide a kind of social guarantee that people stay attached to such an order. This is acceptable as society accepts this. Here social regulation trumps up God, while we believe God is supreme but in reality we make social beliefs and social practices, which are full of contrasts, supreme.

Why this prevalent contrast, which has taken such a deep root? We seldom question it. When Tolstoy said – the kingdom of God lies within you, what did he mean? When Gandhi proclaimed Truth is God and God is Truth, what did he actually mean? Or when Sri Aurobindo argued All Life is Yoga, what did he actually imply? There is one common thread pervading all these arguments – that in God-believing there cannot be a difference between thinking and practice, between ideas and their implementation, and most importantly when we believe in God and worship God, we must live God and God-Reality. Otherwise, it will be better to throw the images and symbols representing God to dustbin– in that way at least we will shed some of our pretense.

Dualism Persists

In the context of human society and human relations, an idea cropped up in my mind when I was watching TV in a friend’s house while staying for few days. It is the concept of duality, or dual lives, or dual personalities (it is different from the psychological concept of split personality). This dualism is deliberate, selfish, and constructed by human being to live in this world. This I came to conclusion while watching religious channels like Samsakara and Astha in TV. The preachers say beautiful, soothing things to the ear. They say some great things, and which are actually needed by the tormented human society, afflicted by the issues of deception, trickery, greed and the vices which humans love to domesticate and love to nurture in own beings. The speakers picked up a theme from Hindu mythology such as Ramayana and Mahabharata and contextualize them to cater to the needs of the present society. A good thing indeed. They preach non-violence, selflessness, social service. They also talk about how to have peace in mind, how to have devotion to God, to have meditating mind and so on. They narrated the stories of Hanuman’s devotion to Rama, and love and surrender of Radha to Krishna and so on. These are really good, and not only that, I am reasonably sure, if a person follows these words sincerely, then there will be great improvement in him and surroundings, no doubt.

But when I think about the practical implications of such an exercise, I find myself dismayed. The analogy narrated by Swami Vivekananda often comes to my mind in this context. He differentiated between a pundit and a yogi. A pundit reads so many things, he is a good narrator, good orator, quotes from scriptures like Vedas and Upanishads with full authority, but while coming to practice he is a nut. While he teaches others to control over their anger, he is an angry man, for example. While he teaches others to conquer desire, he in fact is a slave of this vice, for example. Swami Vivekananda says it is better to be a yogi, than to be a pundit. Yogi is not a scholar, is not well versed in scriptures. But whatever, however few, noble things he knows or learns, he practices. He learns anger is not good, and now he is a man of peace. Now he knows desire has to be conquered, and he conquers it. Hence, while yogis are a rare species, pundits are numerous. While a yogi like Ramakrishna Paramahansa is a rare sight, we find hundreds and thousands of pundits (even I doubt whether all of them have mastery over scriptures) flock our streets, TV sets, and wear the clothes of yellow, and portray themselves as yogis. Some of these pundits do not forget to give them a facial in a beauty salon before public appearance. If preaching for them is a profession, then they are job holders, doing their job, as we do in our work places. But to be a yogi, to be a preacher of noble virtues, one has to be in ‘job’ 24 hours and throughout the life. Putting in the language of Sri Aurobindo, 'all life is yoga.' It is not like preaching for the record, and in the next moment you become a person of all ordinary desires and vices. Ramakrishna was illiterate, and could not write his name correctly, but we all know how great he was, how saintly he was.

But the dualism concept goes much deeper and much farther. This is not confined to the preachers, but spread to the people, including the organizers, who come to listen to the preachers. While these pundits and so called pundits may number hundreds and may be thousands, the people who flock to listen to them number hundreds of thousands. Let me talk about organizers. They are usually rich people. I understand that. Without money power, it is difficult to organize huge events like these ones. Arranging the venue, providing all the facilities like carpets, chairs, etc. to carry on the activities or arranging media and recording system and air conditioning or fans, and to look after the pundit and his group, all need money. The organizers provide money, and also raise money from the listeners and followers. I have no problem, no objection with that. I am concerned with how far these organizers follow the teachings of the pundits. We all come across stories how these people become rich by following foul means, by following short cuts (by avoiding routes of hard work and efforts, while I am saying this obviously I am not referring to all organizers, there are always exceptions). There is also a familiar story how a businessman was putting sugar particles into ant holes, so that the vice he earns by adding sand to sugar in his grocery shop can be compensated by putting few sugar particles into ant holes, for the vice of adding sand to sugar, or stones to rice, can be compensated /balanced by offering alms to beggars or putting sugar in ant holes and so on.

My central question is: are the organizers or the people who contribute to these events are motivated by this spirit of ‘balance’ and ‘compensation?’ If that is the spirit, if that is the underlying motivation, then the whole price in organizing such events is zero, as it is seen, viewed from a commercial, business point of view. It is like killing an animal, and to balance the sin, you nurture another animal. In fact, the concept of fear in religion that if you commit sin you will be punished in after life, and if you commit virtue you will be suitably rewarded in after life is so strong, so motivating, that I see in most of these events, most of these organizations, there is a sense to capitalize on this fear factor. They are motivated by this end game of ‘balance’ and ‘compensation.’

Then what is the end result? It is like coming back to square one. The pundit says you remain calm, think ill of none. You listen to it carefully, and also you know that it is a great thing to practice in life, but the moment the pundit jumps to the second sentence, you forget it, you think about humdrum daily life. It is like Guru Nanak finding a person performing Namaz on the street, while actually thinking about his lost flock of sheep while performing the prayer. Hence, this is the dualism, which must be avoided, curbed and nullified. The only positive thing I can see in these activities is just diversion of time in some harmless things. From that point of view, it may be a fine thing. But, I do not think that is the sole purpose of organizing these events, where millions of people spend time and huge sums of money.

At the end this dualism persists. Leo Tolstoy says, the ‘kingdom of God lies within you.’ Unless the human being realizes the God ‘within,’ all the ‘outside’ practices such as listening to pundits, or going to temples, mosques, gurudwaras, churches and synagogues will be vain. It is the ‘within’ or the inner self of human being that is reflected in his ‘outside’. Unless that realization comes in thought and practice, this dualism will continue with all its vigour, prompting a great soul like Adi Shankara calling the activities of the world as Maya or illusion, because that is not the truth as we see, that only pushes us to live in a world of dualism, in which the outer self, the show, the veneer predominates over the subtle, the inner and the soul.

Dialogue with God

I want to write on something called ‘Dialogue with God.’ Is it possible to have a dialogue with God? I think it is possible. We can have conversation with God, as we have dialogues with our friends, fellow human beings, our surroundings, as well as our inner selves. The most important thing that we need in this context is that we need to have faith, a firm faith, that there is God, and He is close to us, and we can have conversations with him. In this context, I remember the famous Saint of Kolkata (then Calcutta), Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa, whose 175th birth anniversary is celebrated this year. Ramakrishna was famous for his dialogue, his conversation with Goddess Kali. And when his yet to be disciple Narendranath Dutt, later famous as Swami Vivekananda, did not believe the popular saying that the saint in Kali temple has seen and conversed with God, Ramakrishna made him realize God there. On another occasion when penury succumbed to the family of young Narendra, he went to Ramakrishna to seek wealth, and Ramakrishna sent him to Goddess Kali to ask whatever he wants.

My point here is that the once atheist Narendra became a strong believer in God, and a famous preacher of Hindu religion, starting from his famous Chicago address in 1893. Hence, the first requisite to have dialogue with God is to have the firm belief that there is God, who is all ears to us, kind and compassionate, and our friend , philosopher and guide. The second most important prerequisite is our sincerity that if I ask something God in earnest then he will reply. That seeking must be there. If I believe in God’s existence, but does not believe in God’s kindness, his eagerness to help us, his all attention to us, then there is no possibility that one can have dialogue with God. It needs the devotion and love of a Mirabai, or the kind of faith of Aranyaka or Upamnyu, that can lift one to the level, or to the sphere when one can have dialogue with God. And third most important prerequisite is that the seeker must not have any narrow mind, or narrow thinking that seeks God’s blessing for personal benefit. It is like asking for a penny, when the king is ready to offer his kingdom. Unless the seeker rises above petty thinking, above the circle of petty desire, and all its attachments, then it will be difficult to have dialogue with God. It will be like marching fast on the road towards the goal, but the feet are hanging on the air, which is an impossible proposition.

There is the famous case of Mahatma Gandhi, when he says that he received Adesh (order) from God to stop non-cooperation movement, or civil disobedience movement during the Indian freedom struggle. He used to say that he always listened to the inner voice, not to bland arguments of reason or logic. Similarly, the well known freedom fighter, and later yogi and philosopher, Sri Aurobindo, who left Kolkata for Chandan nagar (then a French colony) in 1910, he was saying that he suddenly left the place because there was the divine command, not any personal calculation was involved there. We have seen the results in both the cases.

Hence, there can be a dialogue with God. As there was a dialogue of Nachiketa with Yama, the God of death, similarly there can be a dialogue with God. Again this is not something which can be measured by means of reason and logic. When the Greek philosopher told the great Alexander not to come in front of sunlight to his request for bestowing everything, it is not something which can be explained very rationally.  Hence, I believe, it is absolutely possible to have dialogue with God, as we have dialogues with ourselves, with our inner selves and surroundings.

No doubt, it will be a very beautiful phenomenon, experience to have dialogue with God. It is the dialogue between ignorant and omniscient, between weak and oppressed (not by lack of wealth, but by many other evils) and the omnipotent, and between the brittle beings and transient beings with omnipresent. That will be a wonderful experience, perhaps the most wonderful, even than the great wonders of the world. Even if we think that way, and guide our actions and words in that way, as if there is a God who is looking us and our actions, who is more powerful than us, and always eager to protect us, then perhaps most of anxieties and sufferings that have grappled human beings will vanish. When the greedy will think that God is more wealthy, and it is not material wealth, but wealth of peace, wealth of happiness, that can give the true comfort to mind and body, then the greedy will not be greedy, but rather a servant of mankind as a servant of god, because he will rise himself above individualistic thinking, and guided by universal thinking. It is not foolishness or madness; rather it is the larger freedom, larger and wider than the freedoms offered by capitalism or socialism, which can make human beings wiser, healthier, and happier.