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.  

New Dispensation in New Delhi

The absolute majority of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), under the leadership of Narendra Damodar Modi, in the lower house of Indian parliament has made international news. It is the first time since 1947 when India got independence that a political party other than the Congress secured absolute majority in the lower house.

The media mostly reminds Modi, the Prime Minister-designate, of the 2002 riots and offers advice. Some of the writings have expressed doubt whether Modi will rise above his association with a Hindu organization, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), and put India before his religion and party.

Modi emerged from a humble background. His father was a tea seller. He does not speak British or American English, and not a regular in Delhi elite circles. He was a RSS pracharak. But the membership of RSS does not make one fundamentalist. RSS is guided by Hindu philosophy, which is eclectic. Also, one can not club all RSS members into same mould. Modi’s mentors, Vajapyee and Advani, are known for their association with the RSS. Vajpayee is known as a moderate in politics. The point is association with RSS does not make one fundamentalist.

Barring the scar of 2002, Modi has no taint. Though sections of people believe his complicity in the communal riots in Gujarat when he was the chief minister, the judicial system in India has not found fault with him.

Modi has strong views, unlike Manmohan Singh who preferred to remain silent on many crucial issues. Whether Telecom scam or Commonwealth Games scam, Singh did not exercise his power his office bestowed on him. It was but natural as he had not the real command. The party high command had the baton of power. Modi will not have that handicap. The elections were fought under his leadership. Manmohan Singh did not rise as a politician from the grassroots; rather the prime ministership was thrust on him, while in case of Modi it is different. Manmohan Singh, a celebrated economist known as father of India’s economic reforms left office of PM in ignominy. This is sad for his political legacy, but certainly he will be remembered as one of India’s best brains, which could have been used more effectively.

I remember the famous debate between the two well known economists – Amartya Sen and Jagdish Bhagwati. Bhagwati was a protagonist of Gujarat model of development, while Sen was not. The first one prioritized rapid industrialization and private sector development, while Sen’s model focused on a society-oriented inclusive economic growth. Both models have their merits and demerits. The point is that Congress government under Singh followed Sen’s advice and launched welfare programs (marred by massive corruption), but the electorate of India preferred to vote for Modi.

It is yet to be seen how Modi will replicate the Gujarat model for the country. The people of India, particularly the youth, have high hopes on him.

Some of the great Indian leaders like Mahatma Gandhi and Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel were from Gujarat, the home state of Modi. Some of the great saints like Narsinh Mehta, who wrote famous Vaishnav Jana to Tene Kahiye (Gandhi’s favorite) were from Gujarat. Mehta and another saint-poet Kavi Jayachandra, also from Gujarat, had influenced Gandhi and shaped his life philosophy.  Modi particularly talks about Patel, and is apparently influenced by him. Patel was known as Iron Man of India as he played a key role in assimilating disparate regions of India into one single federal union during early years of India’s independence. Will Modi follow Patel’s footsteps?

As Prime Minister, Modi will lead India, not a particular community or religion. Hence, he is not only a leader of Hindu, but also of Muslim or of any other community in India. Pessimists will always bring back the specter of Godhra and paint him black. But, I am not in a hurry to see Modi in that way. I am an optimist, and will prefer to wait and watch.

Modi has the advantages which some of his predecessors lacked. He does not have a dynasty to promote, or not an immediate family to bestow largesse. In that sense, he will be more like Vajpayee who once commented that it is good that he has no family. He said this as a retort to corrupt politicians who put family before the country. Modi will not fill the seats of his official aero plane a la Deve Gowda who flew whole family with him during some of his official trips. Modi will not have to pay bribes to parliamentarians to support his party during no confidence motions as he enjoys absolute majority in the lower house of the parliament, the decisive body for no confidence. He will not have to indulge in horse-trading (a code name for breaking other parties to win majority), nor he will have the need to engage in scams and forgeries.

Modi is known as an effective administrator in Gujarat. One hopes that he will be an effective administrator in New Delhi. His lack of aristocratic mien will be to his advantage.

Modi’s years in New Delhi will be challenging. Any Mumbai style attack coordinated by hardliners from Pakistan will be a big headache for him. While his Pak counterpart, businessman-turned politician, Nawaz Sharif will prefer to work with him, the hardliners in Pakistan will do everything to scuttle the process. They will plan to orchestrate terrorist attacks to generate a violent response from Modi to further paint him anti-Muslim.

As Prime Minister, Modi will have to take decisive actions on matters home as well as abroad. He should not only be acting above religious bias, but also needs to be seen so. Perhaps he needs to be apprised by his officials the messages from The Prince, written by Machiavelli. The key message – the King (read the person in power) must not only be benevolent towards his subjects, he must also be seen benevolent. Already the Godhra aligned with him, any utterance of M word, will be interpreted differently. To address this, he may have to be innovative. He may have a ministry on communal harmony led by Muqtar Abbas Naqvi, or a cell in his office on it led by religious leaders of all communities. Learning from other models may be useful. Akbar’s Din-E-Elahi is perhaps a good model. Modi can take a cue from it. Even otherwise, there is ample guidance from Sanskrit texts: Sarva Dharma Sambhava and Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam are two messages which any leader wishing to rule multiethnic and pluralistic societies needs to learn.

India has poverty, unemployment, environmental pollution, population explosion, rising Maoism, communal violence, extremism and terrorism, women insecurity and many other problems. Modi knows all these problems, and has promised to address them. It will take time. It is naive to expect that he will successfully address all these problems in one month. One important thing that Modi needs to do is to appoint persons of merit and vision, not sycophants nor corrupt, to high offices. There is no lack of talent in India, and Modi will be able to find enough merit in India to assist him in the mission to raise India to new heights.

Here, I remember the Indian philosopher Sri Aurobindo who on the eve of India’s independence in 1947 had articulated his five dreams. The fourth dream was India’s role as moral and spiritual conscience of the world. Sri Aurobindo had in his mind the cultural and spiritual capital of India and its transformative power to reshape the human society. It needs emphasis this cultural and spiritual capital is not purely Hindu or purely Muslim, but Indian, rising from thousands of years of India’s rich historical and cultural heritage despite all its deformities. Modi may take a leaf from Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Swami Vivekananda. Both had argued India is a pluralistic society, and emphasized on synthesis. One of them had talked about the need of Hindu intellect and Muslim valor.

Modi can also prove Maulana Azad and Nehru right. Jinnah argued that Hindus and Muslims are different nations; hence they need to have different nation-states. Nehru and Azad had argued differently. They had strongly argued that India is a multicultural and pluralistic country in which Hindus and Muslims can stay together. Modi’s policies need to reflect this pluralistic ethos. During his electoral campaigns Modi promised to take all Indians together along with him. And he needs to fulfill that promise while in office.

Whether dealing with internal or external challenges, Modi will have to tread cautiously. Pakistan will be a big challenge. China will be another one. China-Pakistan nexus has not always proved beneficial for India, and Modi has to keep in mind that. While Russia has proved a traditional friend of India, Modi has to devise strategies to balance relations with Russia with that of the USA. Though the USA denied visa to Modi earlier, now it will be interested to deal with Modi, the leader of the largest democracy and also of one of the fastest rising economies. He may also revive the campaign for India’s claim for permanent membership at the United Nations Security Council, the highest and most powerful international body.

Modi will have a better tool in his hand to lift the nation from the morass of poverty and unemployment – two biggest internal challenges. With a strong determination, and by combining the visions of Patel, Shastri and Vajpayee, Modi will be able to trudge through difficult terrains while keeping his mission high.

I wish Modi good luck!

Salabega: An Embodiment of Love and Devotion

I was listening to a famous song written by Salabega, the 17^th century Oriya poet. The songs of Salabega are known almost to everybody in Odisha and in some other parts of India. He is a household name in Odisha. I had an idea that he was a 18^th or 19^th century poet, but a search in internet brought that he was born in the 17^th century. Internet hence proves to be a great utility. I disagree with those who argue that internet diverts our mind, and kills our time. I am a fan of information technology. It has made our life tremendously easy. If a person seeks distraction, it can be a good source. But a person who wants to excel in his field or needs useful information, internet can be a great aid.

Salabega’s story is unique. His mother was an Oriya Hindu Brahmin, while his father was a Bengali Musilm. The story goes that his father Lalbeg, a commander in the Nawab of Bengal’s force had taken part in the campaign against Odisha. While on return he saw this beautiful woman on a pond taking bath. He seized this woman and took away along with him as his prize. He married her (I do not know how far we can characterize it as a marriage. History does not provide much information on it: whether he married her and lived with her as a husband. General belief is that he married her and they lived together as husband and wife).

Salabega, after grown up, took part in campaigns as his father. Once he got severely wounded but could not recover from the wounds, to which his Hindu religious mother suggested to pray Hindu God Krishna. The prayer worked miracle and he was cured. This motivated Salabega to be a devotee of Krishna. Krishna is held an incarnation of Lord Vishnu, and also of Lord Jagannath. Salabega turned to be a devotee of Lord Jagannath.

A few words about Lord Jagannath. Jagannath is considered patron God of Odisha. He is also called living God of Odisha. I have seen people when going out for some work chant Jagannath as they step out of home. I have seen people touching national highways in Odisha and chanting Jay Jagannath (hail to Jagannath), believing that the God will save them from accidents on road and the other problems. There is a long story behind Jagannath, which I will narrate some other time. Suffice to say, Jagannath is a part of parcel of Odisha culture, particularly among the Hindus. The Hindus all over India visit the temple of Jagannath situated on the east coast of Odisha, India. The Jagannath temple is considered to be among the four holiest places for Hindu pilgrimage.

Salabega became a devotee of Jagannath, and started writing poems filled with intense devotion and love for the God. The song I was listening today on YouTube meant that ‘O’ God you are for your devotee, everything you have is of your devotees; you do everything for your devotee.’ It is said that many of his songs were lost as they were not preserved. There is a common trend one can find in Salabega’s poems and devotional songs. He seems to chastise himself, his birth in a family, which is neither Hindu nor Muslim. To paraphrase, he says, ‘My father is son of a Mughal, my mother is a Brahmin, O’ my Lord, you gave me a low-birth.’

The angst is clearly visible in his songs. Though a devotee of Jagannath, Salabega was never allowed to enter the temple because his father was a Muslim. That did not deter this great poet and lover of humanity to continue his work, writing devotional songs. There is a story that once when Salabega was coming from a distant place (perhaps Bengal) to watch Car Festival (this takes place every year, in which the wooden statues of Lord Jagannath along with his brother Valbhadra and sister Subhadra are taken out from the temple by the devotees and placed on wooden cars to visit their aunt’s house This ritual has a strong mythical origin). Salabega thought of watching his God from a close, because for him it was not possible to see the God in the temple. But he was getting late, and he had to walk so much. He wrote in one song, ‘I have to walk 750 kosh (Oriya word, perhaps implying mile).’ The legend has it that the car of Lord Jagannath did not move and stopped at one place despite all efforts by the priests to move the car. Salabega reached the place and had communication with his Lord, and only after that the car moved. To mark and cherish this event, every year even now the car stops for few moments on the road.

I would call Salabega a gift of God. He did not have any formal training in literature or rhetoric or music. His writings were profound, so powerful, it would be impossible to write such inspiring poems without God-given creativity. When I think about this, another powerful Oriya poet comes to my mind, whose name is Bhima Bhoi, whose poems are so powerful, so self-effacing, and so meditating, I doubt whether persons having university degrees could match such poems. I think Salabega belonged to the genre of Bhakti movement. Some other great stalwarts of this movement are Sri Chaitanya and Pancha Sakha (five friends – Balaram, Jagannath, Ananta, Yashowant, and Achyuta). Among many strains of Hindu yogic movements, Bhakti is a prime one which emphasizes on devotion to God. It also demands surrender to God. It is characterized by intense passion and love for God. In that sense it has similarities with another strain called Prema Yoga (meditation of love, in which the Yogi completely surrenders himself to God, and considers the God as if his lover. Mirabai of Mewar was perhaps the highest embodiment of this Yoga, another one was Andal of South India).

When I think deeply about these great devotees who touched the apogee of spiritual realization, I wonder whether the education in the formal institutions can train in these qualities. Most of these people, I mentioned earlier, did not go to any school. Bhim Bhoi was blind, and was a shepherd. Salabega was not educated in the sense we call ourselves educated. But, they left highest imprints in our minds and heart. Their lives were messages.

The life of Salabega raises larger questions before me. Does the education in formal institutions make us really educated? I am not a detractor of modern education system, but I think how far they impart moral and spiritual education to individuals. As I listen regularly the song written by 14^th century Gujarati philosopher, Narsinh Mehta, Vaishanva Jana Jo Tene Kahiye, Jo Pid Parai Janere (the person is divine, who feels and cures the pain of others. One of the favorite songs of Mahatma Gandhi), I realize that true wisdom transcends the limits of formal education as it is not in the pages of book we find it, but rather in a sincere cultivation of our heart and mind. Salabega taught me this.

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.

Mahatma Gandhi's Death Anniversary: Reflections

On 30 January 65 years ago Mahatma Gandhi was shot while attending a prayer in New Delhi. Everyday he used to attend prayers, which served two purposes: to pray God for well being of mankind, and to meet visitors and interact with them. Before closing his eyes eternally he uttered thrice Ram, the Hindu God, considered an ideal to be emulated in practical life. 

Two famous songs Gandhi used to listen during these prayer sessions included: Vaishnav jan to tene kahiye je pid parai jane re (the person is divine, who feels other’s pain); and Raghupati Raghav Rajaram (a prayer to Ram). The first song was written by the 15^th century Gujarati saint-poet Narsinh Mehta, a prayer full of devotion and love, imploring individual not to immerse in self-aggrandizement, but to care for others. The spirit behind the song is: service to mankind is service to God. The second one is a prayer seeking divine grace for the well being of mankind. This song is still popular in India, and sung on many occasions. Gandhi was not only listening to the prayers but also following them in practice. Hypocrisy was foreign to him. A noble thing learnt is meant for practice. For him, there was no separation between thought and practice. A British educated, renowned lawyer in South Africa, Gandhi left the riches except a loin cloth to ‘experiment with truth’ in India.

Religion had impacted Gandhi’s politics. He was influenced by his mother, a pious lady, and listened from her stories of Hindu scriptures. But his religion was not a religion of exclusion. The opposite was true. For him, all religions are paths to God-realization. Religion does not mean ritualism or dogmatism. Gandhi would argue if ritualism or dogmatism is an obstacle against God-realization, better they be shun. They are utilitarian so far they help seeker to move closer to God. He wrote that all religions are like different flowers which make the garden beautiful. While India was burning in communal fire with Hindus and Muslims killing each other after the partition of the subcontinent, Gandhi instead of attending the independence celebrations in Delhi marched to far flung areas to douse the fire. He insisted that new-born Pakistan must have its due share in resources of undivided India. He was killed by a fanatic Hindu, who saw in activities of Gandhi strains of anti-Hinduism.

Gandhi’s religious views influenced his action. When an inmate of his Ashram cut a small branch of a tree in a careless action, Gandhi’s anger was without limit. He saw life in everything, both animate and inanimate things. For him, in an animal or a tree dwells God, as in a human being.  Gandhi’s politics is spiritualized politics. The prayers, readings from scriptures deeply influenced his thought and action. He was called a politician among saints and saint among politicians. His vision of an ideal state is what he termed Ram Rajya (Kingdom of Ram or God), a place in which Truth reigns supreme. Ram, the Hindu God, is considered an ideal king who followed the rules honestly and did not hesitate to be harsh on his family members if the rule demanded. The mythology says, not only human beings, but also animals had the right to seek justice from King Ram.

For Gandhi, the poor must factor first in policy making. He offered an advice to policy makers. In what is famously called Bapu’s talisman, he exhorted policy makers, “Whenever you are in doubt, or when the self becomes too much with you, apply the following test. Recall the face of the poorest and the weakest man whom you may have seen, and ask yourself, if the step you contemplate is going to be of any use to him. Will he gain anything by it? Will it restore him to a control over his own life and destiny? In other words, will it lead to swaraj (freedom) for the hungry and spiritually starving millions? Then you will find your doubts and your self melt away.” Juxtapose this to Rajiv Gandhi (a former prime minister of India), who confessed: one rupee that federal government releases for poor is reduced to 10 paisa (1 rupee = 100 paisa) at destination. Though Indian currency notes display the image of Gandhi, the massive corruption at higher and lower echelons of administration displays a stark contrast. The irony is clear. Though Gandhi is worshiped as father of the nation in India, the real working of Indian polity has sacrificed him in the altar of corruption, communalism and self-aggrandizement. On the question of self-aggrandizement, Gandhi’s views were very clear. He says, earth has for everybody’s need but not for anybody’s greed. He led by example. He led a frugal life. When King George V inquired  during Gandhi’s visit to Buckingham place in 1931, why the Indian leader had put on scant cloth Gandhi’s reply was: The King had enough on for both of us.

In Gandhi’s life philosophy there is no disparity between the inner and the outer. The person who is honest and truthful in his inner core can not be dishonest and corrupt in his activities. Gandhi articulates well that there is no limit to human greed. Greed not only leads to corruption and demoralizes public and private life but also concentrates wealth in the hands of the few at the cost of the many. He argues a different kind of economic arrangement in society in which the rich will not be the possessor of their wealth, but a trustee of it, not for self-indulgence but for the greater well being of society. The Gandhian dream of an ethical India, in which rich and poor have same life-values, has apparently crumbled if one looks at India today.

Gandhi once commented that if women of the world unite they can kick atom bomb like a foot ball. For him, women and men are equal. Women with their power of compassion can make a better world than their male counterparts. He was almost an icon among women. When he visited London suburbs and working class areas in 1931, women flocked in large numbers to meet him. As displayed by media, the old frail man was surrounded by women during his visit to textile workers in suburbs of London. 

He was concerned at arms race that was picking speed during early days of the cold war. At Asia Relations Conference in New Delhi in 1947, he argued for a non-violent, peaceful world, where nations whether in Asia and Africa, or in other continents, would realize their full potentials in the spirit of harmony and brotherhood. As colonialism was still a raging phenomenon those days, Gandhi in this conference raised the pitch to fight against this menace through non-violence. In his words, “I do not want merely to appeal to your head. I want to capture your heart … In this age of democracy, in this age of awakening of the poorest of the poor, you can redeliver this message with the greatest emphasis. You will complete the conquest of the West, not through vengeance, because you have been exploited, but with real understanding. I am sanguine, if all of you put your hearts together–not merely heads–to understand the secret of the message these wise men of the East have left to us, and us if we really become worthy of that great message, the conquest of the West will be completed. This conquest will be loved by the West itself.”

Gandhi’s ideas related to alcohol, animal-killing and Brahmacharya (celibacy, a crude translation) are almost extinct from public debate. His autobiography is full of accounts how he struggled in his inner life to conquer desire. He conquered desire. He was a noble soul. It is apt to quote Einstein, who pays a fitting tribute to Gandhi, “A leader of his people, unsupported by any outward authority; a politician whose success rests not upon craft or mastery of technical devices, but simply on the convincing power of his personality; a victorious fighter who has always scorned the use of force; a man of wisdom and humility, armed with resolve and inflexible consistency, who has devoted all his strength to the uplifting of his people and the betterment of their lot; a man who has confronted the brutality of Europe with the dignity of the simple human being, and thus at all times risen superior. Generations to come, it may be, will scarce believe that such a one as this ever in flesh and blood walked upon this earth.”