Bhakti - Discovering the God of Love

The history of the world is fraught with wars, few of which like the 'Hundred years war' between the English and French and the Holy Crusades had lasted for many decades. Some of these wars, like the struggle for power between Babylonians, Greeks and the Persians, had even continued over many centuries.  However, all of these wars pale in comparison in terms of their longevity with another 'war' that has been going on for over many millennium. It is the war between the 'heart' (emotion) and 'head' (rational) for dominance over the matters of the soul in the spiritual world. Both sides have taken turns to  dominate for some time with neither managing  to record a conclusive victory. While the philosophers  have declared 'I think, therefore I am', the devout have roared back,  'I love. Therefore I am' ( though not in exact these same words). Interestingly, this 'war' had been fought both in the western and oriental world approximately during the same time period.

During the final centuries of BCE,  philosophy had dominated the realm of religion.  For the philosopher,  God was an abstract entity devoid of any worldly qualities including human nature and emotions. We see this in the philosophy of Plato, the Buddhist concept of 'emptiness', the Tao of Lao Tsu from China  and the Vedic concept of 'Brahman'. The pathway to God realization was through learning, understanding, reflecting, meditating and abstaining  from worldly engagements. The schools of philosophy that emanated at the time in India, the likes of Sāmkhya, Nyāya ,Vaiseshika etc. were also of this viewpoint.

But then, there was another common, human phenomenon - Love -  that also was also abstract and beyond definition. One may be tempted to quickly say that 'Love' is an emotion. Think again, is it? Love is instinctive and one knows when it is present and when it is not, whether expressed or unexpressed. 'Love' appears to happen in the soul and its awareness. And, without love, life may exist but it cannot be intelligent or know joy.

Spiritual masters who had realized the ultimate had never become devoid of love. Vālmiki in Rāmāyana was perturbed by the plight of a bird whose companion was killed by a hunter.  Gautama Buddha was extremely compassionate about the sufferings of people. Even the Rishis of Upanishads who have expounded on the 'Nirguna Parabrahman'  have not depicted God as insensitive to the world. In the Kena Upanishad where the Brahman is defined as a principle beyond human comprehension, there is a metaphorical story of Brahman appearing in the form of an Yaksha to  correct the boisterous Deva clan who were celebrating their victory over their rival, the Asura clan. In the Chāndogya Upanishad, the Brahman which is described to be abstract is also metaphorically described as the 'Golden Purusha in the Sun'. However, it is also very clear that the God of the Upanishads was certainly not one who would want to continuously meddle with the ways of the world.

The Biblical God of Jewish religion, Jehovah,  is as human in nature as one could imagine a God to be. He is envious, punishing, partisan and demands sacrifices. Jesus Christ changed the understanding of this all-powerful, angry God to the loving figure of 'Father in the Heaven', who was both benevolent and merciful.  The God of Christianity became the single, 'creator' God who had condemned humanity for its 'original sin' but then  begotten a son, Jesus,  to offer humanity the opportunity for redemption. Over a period of time, 'Love' has come to be central to Christianity than its theology.

The Greeks had started with the idea that Gods are heroes who accomplish great deeds. These Gods slew monsters, fought in wars  and intervened in human life to support those who cared for them and made life difficult for others. Reading through Homer's tales, one may wonder what exactly is the 'Godliness' in most of them! Being a "God' on Mount Olympus was more like a privileged existence. With the advent of philosophy in the later periods, through  the likes of Plato and Aristotle, there was a much better refinement to the concept of God in Greek civilization. Again, like their Indian counterparts, the philosophers of Greece and Rome also struggled to fit 'love' into the fold of an abstract entity that God was.

In the western world, the first religious leader who effectively combined the rationalism of philosophical thinking with  'love', was St. Augustine who lived in the 4th century CE. St. Augustine had transformed himself from a loosely led life by effectively integrating the thoughts of religious leaders like St. Paul and philosophers like Plato. St. Augustine's contributions were also instrumental in establishing the theological foundation for Christianity. During the same time In India, the devotional stream of religion had cut a parallel course to the schools of philosophy. Some of it, as in the Puranas, had followed a path similar to the Greek, where the Gods were heroes who accomplished many deeds, mostly ensuring a win for good over evil. It is interesting to note that  most of these purānic Gods were worshipped but not really 'loved'. The Ithihāsas like Maha Bhāratha and Rāmāyana had introduced the concept of God taking a human form and living a human life. Building up further on this, another parallel stream, that of Vaishnavites, had followed a path similar to early Christianity, establishing a single creator God in Lord Vishnu,  who was all-powerful, benevolent and compassionate. Similar thought process led to the advent of Saivites who believed this single, powerful God to be Lord Shiva as also the Sākteyas who considered the female Devi to be the primordial, benevolent, all-powerful God.

India had to wait until 9th century CE to get an equivalent of St. Augustine. Adi Sankara was the first religious leader in Hindu religion to effectively integrate the philosophy of Vedanta with six different Bhakti movements that had become predominant during his time. Adi Sankara, through the campaign of debates he did across India,  also effectively reduced the influence of many schools of philosophy.  After Adi Sankara's time, the only schools of philosophy that remained significantly influential were Vedanta and Yoga. Adi Sankara composed many hymns, that expounded poetically on devotion and love. My favorite is his hymn on the River Ganga which is musical, poetic and beautiful in its expressions of love, affection and regard.

In the Hindu religion, the God who is adored most is probably Lord Rama while the God who is loved most is undoubtedly Lord Sree Krishna. Worship of Vāsudeva Krishna supposedly dates back into BCEs. But the widespread popularity and following probably happened post  8th century. What is unique about Lord Sree Krishna is that he is worshiped as a God in many forms corresponding to his life stages; as a toddler, child, young adult, youth and middle aged. It will take volumes to write comprehensively on who and what Sree Krishna was.It is also extremely difficult to write even one sentence on what he was not. The oceanic poetry of Sant Sur Das, thousands of verses of Srimad Bhagavatam  and the romantic lyrics of Sree Jayadeva together feel incomplete in depicting all dimensions of Sree Krishna's mystifying personality. Through Bhagawad Gita, Sree Krishna has offered  a means to live a balanced spiritual life combining rational thinking, active living, devotion, love and compassion. Let's remember and offer our pranams once again to him on this day of Sree Krishna Jayanthi.

As the Bhakti movement gained momentum in India during the 10 thru 15th Century CE, there was an explosion in temple building all across India. And, the means of worship also evolved becoming more and more social and community focused. There was also the pressing need in the intellectual circles to reconcile philosophical thinking and Bhakti. As a result were born the  Dhvaita school of philosophy of Sri Mādhwachārya followed by the Visishtādvaita philosophy of Sri Rāmanuja. (More on this, later). There was also the influence of Sufi practices that followed the Islamic invasions after the 10th century CE, which resulted in a different stream of Bhakti practitioners of the like Chaitanya Mahāprabhu in the Eastern regions of India. This trend of Bhakti's domination in the society's mainstream continued until the 19th century CE when Swami Vivekananda turned the tide once again towards rational thinking and Vedānta.

Today, our generation is in a uniquely advantageous position to understand the value and purpose of Bhakti (devotion) and Gnāna (knowledge). Success in spiritual life awaits those who are able to effectively utilize and balance both Bhakti and Gnāna, the practice of which Lord Sree Krishna calls as Buddhi Yoga.

Ramayana - A spiritual journey?

Continuing from the last blog post "Ramayana - The autobiography of a Rishi?")

Here is a million dollar ethics question. What exactly makes someone 'good'? Is it the person's actions, virtues, thoughts or intentions?  Valmiki, in his wisdom, seems to have come to the conclusion that it is intention that ultimately matters. For example, in Ramayana, we see the negative character of Ravana who was a great devotee of  Lord Shiva and had performed a long, arduous penance to Brahma (all good actions) but, at the same time, had the bad intent of perpetuating evil. On the other hand, we see Sugriva who had made a bad decision to close the mouth of the cave where his brother Vali was fighting with a demon, having assumed that Vali was dead.  Sugriva was severely punished by Vali, who had survived the fight with the demon. He was meted out this unfair punishment in spite of him having done his 'bad action' with a good intent. Vali who didn't care for Sugriva's explanation and acted 'unethically' was ultimately punished by Rama.

Later in the epic, we see the positive character of Vibheeshana who deserted the side of his brother Ravana and allied with the enemy to bring him down.  His actions in this regard could be interpreted as completely unethical based on the general norms. However, Vibheeshana does his actions with the good intent of preserving righteousness in the world and hence is respected and rewarded.

In general, we find  this effort to delineate good from evil based on intention, all across Ramayana.  It is in this context that we need to see Valmiki's attempt to symbolize the abstract idea of 'goodness'  through the character of Sita, deriving her name from the sanskrit word 'Satva' meaning purity. Moreover, it was important for Valmiki to see 'goodness' married to the 'intelligent self', to depict the ideal human he had sought in Rama.

As we all know, good intentions can get easily misled by misconceptions that are the mirages (mareechika) of life. A golden deer desired by Sita, lured Rama away into the forest. A trickery by the disguised Rakshasa, aptly named Maareecha, forced Lakshmana to leave Sita unguarded.  Ravana who is completely convinced that Sita deserves to be his queen and no one else's, abducted her to Lanka. Thus, we get introduced in the epic to the Rakshasa brothers Ravana, Kumbhakarna and Vibheekshana. Ravana, who is also known as Dasagreeva, i.e.,  ten headed, has come to be one of the greatest symbol of evil in India's Ithihasa tradition.

Now let's look at this from a spiritual journey perspective. The primary obstacle in the path of a spiritual seeker is the mind. We all know that this mind of ours, sometimes has 'a mind of its own', compelling one to act against own will. Hence it has been rightly said, "the heart has its own ways that the intellect will never understand".  Manojaya or the overcoming of the compulsive nature of mind is the goal of every spiritual seeker who is seeking moksha, i.e liberation and freedom. 

Coming back to the context of Ramayana, those of you familiar with the geographical shape of the island of Lanka, would know that it is shaped like a heart. Valmiki places the ten-headed Dashagriva, the power of conscious mind with its control  over the five sense organs and five organs of action, as the king of Lanka. His brother, the power of sub-conscious mind, is Kumbhakarna or the 'potbelly eared'. The sub-conscious is mostly asleep but has the incredible ability to listen to everything happening and retain impressions. And, as Freudian thinking goes, the subconscious mind  is a giant in terms of the power it wields. The third brother, Vibheeshana, is fearless in voicing his considered opinion like the conscience within us. Conscience becomes an ally to the intelligent self. Thus it appears to me that the stage set in Lanka for the war as depicted in Ramayana,  is a symbolic representation of  the struggle of a spiritual seeker to gain mastery over mind, that too with the goal of releasing 'goodness' from subservience to the compulsive powers of emotions and mental impressions.

Now, let us look at the allies of the intelligent self in this war. They are primarily Sugriva, the firm-necked one, who symbolizes mental discipline and Hanuman, the symbol of Shraddha (faith) and Bhakti (devotion). Vali who symbolizes the prolific nature of mind which is highly distracting and prone to unethical behavior, is killed and Sugriva is established as king of 'vanara'. The ocean that represents the continuous disturbances arising from the heart, is overcome with a bridge built with the blessings of Varuna, who is the God of universal order. This march to Lanka by the vanara army of Sugriva and Hanuman may very well represent the process that Patanjali calls in Yogasutra as 'pratiprasava', i.e., the reversal of the process of origination.(More on this at another time}

On attaining victory, the intelligent self, Rama, is now reunited with goodness, Sita, and regains the kingdom of Ayodhya. Sita is accepted by Rama only after she proves to be untainted from association with the compulsive natures of mind. This spiritual evolution of being good and becoming completely devoid of any selfishness or motives is what Valmiki considers as 'pattabhisheka' and 'Ramarajya'  or the attainment of true lordship over life. This feels like the culmination of the story, but Interestingly, Valmiki  doesn't end the spiritual journey with this attainment. 

In the Uttara Ramayana, we find Rama's abandonment of Sita and the birth of Lava and Kusha. For a spiritual seeker who has reached the highest level of maturity, even goodness is only a relative consideration from the earthly life's perspective. In the journey to the absolute, the Satva quality is also finally given up by the seeker and thus Sita is depicted as being abandoned and  returned to her mother, the Earth. 

The story of Rama's journey is then elaborated by Sage Valmiki and shared though the twins Lava and Kusha.

Lava, his name derived from the word Lavana meaning salt, is symbolic of the Grihasta Asrami (those who stay on the family oriented life). Kusha, indicative of the kusha grass used by ascetics is symbolic of the  Vanaprastins and Sanyasins (those who have retired to the forest for contemplative life). This could mean that there are two interpretations possible of Ramayana, one based on Bhakti for Grihasta Asramins  by Lava and other based on Gnana for ascetics, by Kusha. The former is better established and known widely while what you see here is an attempt to discover more of the latter.

Ramayana is an incredibly resourceful scriptural text and has remained a beacon of enlightenment for many over the centuries. That it continues to offer still new perspectives only speaks volumes to the greatness of this story and the genius of the mind of Sage Valmiki.

PS: The interpretation above is by no means an attempt to belittle or nullify the other existing views. It is only an alternate, exploratory view from a purely spiritual perspective

Ramayana - The autobiography of a Rishi?

The story of Ramayana is embedded in the heart of every Indian, educated and uneducated alike, irrespective of religious affiliation. It is very much doubtful  if there ever was  another work by a single person,  inspiring and influencing in such an undiminished  manner for more than two millenniums. Many in India and the world have continued to celebrate the birth of Rama on the Ramanavami day with same  reverence and religiosity as has been done for centuries. However, after having read and re-read this epic and its multiple interpretations many a times over, I had recently started to wonder if in fact we had failed to recognize the real hero of this epic. Valmiki, the author of Ramayana, didn't name the book as Rama katha (story of Rama) or Rama Charitha (historical exposition on Rama). He instead chose to call it as Rama ayana ,i.e., Rama's journey. It is quite reasonable to suspect if Valmiki had seen a reflection of his own spiritual journey in Rama's travails. Is the  story of Valmiki deftly hidden inside this story of Rama and is he the real hero here?

The story of the origins of Valmiki is that he was a robber in the forest, who would mercilessly attack the passers by for loot. He is supposed to have been transformed by a group of Rishis who forced him to consider the futility of living such a sinful life.  This robber, Rantakara, takes to a life of contemplation and is so lost in his meditation that a Valmikam, i.e., anthill forms all around him. Awakened from this deep meditation, Ratnakara emerges from the anthill as a Rishi and is named Valmiki. 

Now, consider this. Aren't each of us actually living the life of a robber, taking from the world what comes by, for own survival?  Isn't this very system of having to kill in order to live that actually bothered Ratnakara?   We again find this agony coming from Valmiki, when he encounters a hunter who kills the male partner of a pair of birds.  The answer of saints and philosophers to this fundamental question has mostly been practical only to those few who were ready to withdraw into a shell from the general society.  And, to that scenario arrived Valmiki, refusing to stay in the shell and asking the question, is a perfect life feasible while living in the midst of this world? And, thus begins the spiritual journey of Valmiki and the story of Ramayana. (Ramayana starts with the words 'thapa' and 'swaadhyaya', contemplation and self-learning, the two fundamental 'must have' s for a a spiritual journey)

The story begins with the four sons who are born to King Dasharatha; Rama, Lakshmana, Bharatha and Shatrugna. This could be an attempt to represent the self as partitioned into four; an intelligent self (Rama), an aspirational self (Lakshmana), a transactional self (Bharatha) and a survivalist self (Shatrugna). Logically, every one of us have these four parts within us. It is ideal for the intelligent self to be the ruler. However, the attempt of the intelligent self to be the ruler is prevented by the Rajo guna of Prakriti, (Kaikeyi) who prefers the transactional self to be the ruler. The pathway for the intelligent self to become the ruler of self is a journey  inward, which is depicted in Ramayana as a banishment to the forests of  the south.

Encountering and eliminating many negative forces, Rama mostly spends his time in forest at Chitrakoota. From the perspective of the inner world, Chitrakoota or the place where the images are formed, is where our many perception of external world  conglomerate. One of the major steps in the spiritual journey is to be able to have an objective view of these images and destroy the negative tendencies that adversely impact them. From Chitrakoota, Rama moves to Panchavati, the mount with five gardens. The concept of the five Pranas as the energy fields of the life force is well known in the Hindu schools of philosophy.  Again, the control of Prana and objective disassociation of one's self from the movements of prana is the next important stage in spiritual practice.

We haven't yet discussed the important character of Rama's wife, Sita. The word 'Sita' appears to be  derived the word 'Satva', the quality of goodness and luminescence. The goal of every spiritual practitioner is to increase the Satva nature of self and minimize the Rajas and Tamas natures. In the context of Ramayana, Sita appears to be the sole companion of Rama, as goodness must be that of the intelligent self of a spiritual practitioner. As Rama comes to find out soon, there is an extreme difficulty to being good.

More of that journey on the next blog post. Have a wonderful Sri Rama Navami!

The Hindu way of living

One of the definitions that gets thrown around for Hindu Religion is that it is a 'way of life'.  I have wondered many a times what exactly that means, because there is considerable variation in the way life is lived by the many Hindus. Some are very ritualistic and some are not. Some believe in holy places, holy cows, God men or God women  etc. and some are vehemently opposed to these . Some Hindus can recite from memory the voluminous scriptures while the majority seem to  have not even read a few lines of the same texts. What then is common in the way of living that could be classified as 'Hindu way of living'? Here are some thoughts.

To start with let's look at what could be a definition of 'way of living'. The closest definition I could come up with was that 'way of living' is a consistent pattern of behavior and attitude exhibited in life by a group of people who share a common set of beliefs and value systems. Fair enough?

In the last blog post, 'Who is a Hindu and what it means to be one', I had tried to examine the belief system of Hindu religion. Now, the question remaining to me was, what exactly is the value system of Hindu Religion?

As we all know, any value system must comprise a set of guiding principles and virtues as well as a set of injunctions on what to do and what not to do. Here is a quick summary of what I found these to be from the Hindu Religion perspective.

The Guiding Principles

The guiding principles are like the North star. They set us on the right direction and one would try to align with them as much as possible. However, an absolute determination of one's position with respect to them turns out to be a futile exercise. Here are three guiding principles that are prominent in Hindu Religion.

Non-violence (Ahimsa): Ahimsa is a commitment to not cause intentional harm or injury, especially with the motive of making personal gain or having pleasure. However, it does not mean cowing away when need arises to fight injustice or protect oneself or one's own. Resorting to violence is considered only as a last resort and also is expected to be done with a clear conscience and control (not mindless violence).

Truth (Satyam) : Satyam is the commitment to maintaining truthfulness in words, deeds and thoughts. This is founded on the Upanishad saying 'satyameva jayate na anritam' (Truth alone becomes victorious, not falsehood) that also happens to be Republic of India's motto on the national emblem.

Ethical Living (Dharma): The meaning of Dharma is broader than ethics because in addition to maintaining ethical standards, it also implies performing one's expected duty to the family, society and the world. The intent of Dharma is to live a life that supports the preservation of goodness and harmony.

The Virtues

Virtues are qualities of character one would consciously develop but demonstrate unconsciously. Virtues offer only one thing in return, they simply make us a better human being. Here are few of the virtues that are most important to the Hindu.

Humility (amaanitvam & adambitvam): Boisterousness and arrogance stem from two kinds of wrong understanding. One, that accomplishments or possessions are the sole result of own abilities and effort. Two, that one's power, social status, abilities, family connections etc. are permanent and always supportive.  True humility, not the pretentious kind, is completely free of such misunderstandings. It is based on a sense of equality with other human beings, genuine gratitude to others and the belief that God's grace has a role to play.

Forbearance (Kshaanti): As we all know, life is not perfect or fair. There will be times when things do not go our way and there will be situations that provoke us to stray from the guiding principles and shun virtues. Forbearance is the virtue that helps us to tide over such difficult times and stay true to our goals.

Straight forwardness (Aaarjavam):  Conceit is an attractive strategy for those who relish opportunistic, short term gains. However, the price we pay for the gains made through conceit is the complexity and insecurity created within our minds and the resulting absence of inner peace. Simplicity in thinking is the hallmark of a person who  has purified himself internally. Maintaining straight forwardness in thinking and actions goes a long way in helping one to experience inner peace and tranquility.

Compassion (Daya):  Compassion and empathy emanating from the feeling of oneness with fellow beings alone is free of selfishness. The acts of charity that follow such compassion offer the greatest relief to those who suffer.

The Injunctions

Injunctions are call to action, either in terms of doing or avoiding. Here is an example from the Taitiriya Upanishad:

'satyam vada dharmam chara matru devo bhavah pitru devo bhava aachaarya devo bhava aditi devo bhavah'

'Speak the truth, live ethically, be worshipful of your mother, father, teacher and the guests'

While there are many injunctions that are distributed all over the Hindu scriptures, the following five, called as Pancha Maha Yagnas, arppear to be comprehensive and are considered as 'must do' for a Hindu.

Offerings to God (Daiva Yagna) : An offering to God could be a two minute silent prayer at home or worship at a temple or a ritualistic fire sacrifice. The value of Daiva Yagna is not as much in the elaborateness or pompousness of the rituals as the consistency and continuity of remembrance of God during a day's activity. A great master like Adi Sankara had achieved a state of mind where he could easily declare 'yad yad karma karomi tat tat akhilam sambho thavaaraadanam' , meaning 'O Sambho, every single action of mine is done as an offering to you'.

Offerings to parents and ancestors (Pitru Yagna): It is a Hindu custom to remember one's ancestors on the New Moon day and the days of solstice. However,  any action that shows respect, gratitude and reverence to those who had been here before us is a Pitru Yagna. In its least but not insignificant form, Pitru Yagna is reflected in the respect accorded to the elders of society.

Offerings to Society (Manushya Yagna): Acts of common good, sharing, charity as well as selfless social endeavors fall into the category of Manushya Yagna.  Human race would never have been what it is today but for the willingness of many to perform this voluntarily.

Offerings to Beings (Bhuta Yagna): The awareness that humans are not the only ones who need to be cared for was entrenched in the Indian thinking process a long time ago. Caring for nature and its beings are equally important to the Hindu as offerings to God. This has also been expressed in many parts of India as worship of animals and trees.

Offerings to Knowledge (Brahma Yagna): Commitment to gaining knowledge, spiritual or material, is expected to be a daily practice in a Hindu's life. The importance education has in India is probably a result of this practice that was well ingrained into the Indian culture. Even those masters of Hind Religion who have gained mastery over the scriptural texts make it a point to spend some time every day to educate themselves as well as share their knowledge.

What is not a Hindu way of life?

If the above are the components of a Hindu way of living, what is not a Hindu way of living? Here is a description of that from Bhagawad Gita:

'kaamam asritya dushpooram  dhambamaana madaanvitaa

mohaat grihitva asat grahaan pravarthanthe asuchi vrataa' (B.G Chapter 16 Sloka 10)

"Counting on insatiable desires (to motivate), influenced by boisterousness, vanity and arrogance, hankering for the impermanent in delusion, acts a person who is committed to the unwholesome'

I am sure  this sounds familiar as we see it all around us in society (and occasionally in the mirror too!) . Be aware that unwholesome acts are not part of Hindu way of living!

Who is a Hindu and what it means to be one

Approximately 1/7th of the world's population claim their religion to be 'Hindu'. Out of this 1 billion plus people there are not many who can clearly articulate what makes them Hindu or what it means to be a Hindu. The term 'Hindu' itself was originally constructed to encompass all the people living in the geographical region east of the Sindu (Indus) river. Even today, if you are a citizen of India and you haven't accepted any other faith as your religion, guess what, you are most likely identified as a Hindu! There is no religious authority in place who could bestow admittance to Hindu religion or take it away from someone. Neither are there any mandatory  injunctions on what a Hindu must do. In this context, let us take a fresh look at what exactly makes someone Hindu.  

What makes one a Hindu?

What makes one a Hindu is best defined by the sanskrit expression 'Shraddhaa  Bhakti Samanvita'  meaning '(living a spiritual life) led equally by Shraddha and Bhakti'.

1. Shraddha (Faith) To be a Hindu, one must have shraddha in the Veda, Ithihaasa and Puraana texts as well as their corollaries found in the Hindu faith system. (In case you are not familiar with these terms, please read the previous blog post 'An aerial survey of Hindu religion' to know more about what Veda, Itihaasa and Puraana are)  Shraddha does not mean  a binding, limiting, unquestioning faith in a book, ideas, a specific 'named God' or the historicity of the mythological stories . Shraddha is an attitudinal disposition that enables one to approach the Veda, Ithihaasa and Puraana texts with a positive frame of mind. In other words, approaching them with the conviction that there is truth worth pursuing within these texts, even when that truth may not be apparent. Again, Shraddha does not mean a blind allegiance to every single word or idea within these texts, especially in a literal sense.
2. Bhakti (Reverence to God). Hindu religion is theistic and believes in a single 'God principle', and not a single 'God person'. Every Hindu is imbued with a reverence to this God principle that they may symbolize this in many God images and natural phenomena.  There are many degrees of intensity to which this reverence is expressed using images and objects as 'proxy'.  At its core, Bhakti is the love and reverence to a God who is the essential, single awareness in every being.

Can a Hindu believe in other religions?

Hinduism is a broad, all encompassing, diverse and tolerant religion. A Hindu can attend, participate and even practice another religion's rituals and practices as long as this is done without compromising Shraddha and Bhakti as explained above. For example, Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa had taken instructions and  practiced both Christianity and Islam in addition to his Hindu faith. In the same token, those in other religions who want to practice or participate in Hindu religion should be allowed to do so. However, since it is not possible to belong to more than one religion the same time, it would require for one to have the mindset of keeping Hinduism as the primary religion to be considered a Hindu. 

Should one offer worship in a Temple to be Hindu?

Temple worship only forms one component of the Hindu religion and is not considered mandatory. One may choose not to step into any Temple and could still be a Hindu. Temples provide a great way to bring the Hindus together as a community and also serves a spiritual purpose (Please see the previous blog post on 'what I see when I go to a temple' for details). There are three core tenets to the Hindu religious practice. They are 'thapa' which is contemplation and meditation, 'swaadhyaaya' which is spiritual learning and 'ishwara pranidhaana' which is  an attitude of surrender to God. This surrender to God aspect could be expressed either in the form of daily prayers at home, temple worship, charity work or a combination of all of them.

Should one have a 'caste' to be Hindu?

Caste is one of the most misconstrued social phenomena that is attributed to Hindu religion. Hindu religion had a 'varna' classification and this classification was later interposed with the social division of castes in the Indian society that was based on professions. The end result was a chaotic situation that proliferated discrimination and social inequality.

The word 'varna' means color. It was intended to indicate what colors our actions, viz., what motivates people to perform action, especially religious action. As we all know, two people may perform an exact same action, but they could have very different motivations.  In the Bhagawad Gita Krishna says 'chaatur varnyam mayaa srishtam gunakarma vibhaakasa' , meaning 'the four varna classes, delineated by the quality of actions were created by me'. What are these quality delineations? Let's examine.

The four 'varna' classification in Hindu religion are Brahmana (Priestly class), Kshatriya (Warrior class), Vaisya (Trader class) and Sudra (Working class). All four of them are Hindu by the definition we discussed earlier. Those outside of the Hindu religion were called as 'Daasyu' and were mostly constituted of the tribal population who lived away from the civilized populace.

A Sudra (Worker class) is religious because of fear and insecurity. He or she would remember God and religion when feeling threatened and will forget both as soon as the danger passes. Most of those who did manual labor for living in the cities of olden times were identified as Sudra as their religious fervor was generally inconsistent. Hence the Sudra were not initiated into learning the Veda, a studentship that  required many years of austerity and hardship. A Sudra's action were colored by fear, and was associated with the color Black.

A Vaisya (Trader class) is religious because of his desire for prosperity. He or she would be more than happy to share a part of earned wealth for temples and charity etc. with the intent that such actions will bring them or their progeny still more prosperous life in future. The traders and industrialists have traditionally been identified as Vaisya because of their eye for profit in transactions. A Vaisya's action are colored by materialistic thinking  and is associated with color of Bronze.

A Kshatriya (Warrior class) is religious because of his desire to accomplish and excel. He or she seeks strength and power from religion so as to do better in their field.  The Kshatriya of olden days were warriors and kings but in modern times, they probably are the Corporate Executives and CEOs! A Kshatriya's actions are colored by aggression and is associated with color Red

A Brahmana (Priestly class) is religious because of  desire for knowledge and God realization. He or she is not driven by any worldly, tangible motive and are generally self-directed in their quest. The Brahmana of olden days were mostly priests and teachers. In modern times, they could just be in any profession, continuing their search for truth in parallel to whatever else they may do for living. Because of a Brahmana's propensity to learn and enlighten, they are associated with the color White.

The latter three, other than Sudra, were called as 'Dwija' or twice-born. They all were required to make an explicit commitment to learn Veda as a student  and this initiation ceremony, Upanayana, was considered as their second birth. Only the Brahmana was authorized to teach Veda since  only they put in the required effort for mastery.

It was easy for the society to enforce the norms that the progeny of, say a Brahmana, would be a Brahmana and thus was started the concept of 'kula' or lineage and duties called as 'kula dharma' based on birth. This had, however, not prevented others from learning or teaching. Sage Viswamtra  who is the Rishi of the most highly revered mantra  called Gayatri, was a Kshatriya by birth.  The wisest and most learned person in Mahabharatha, Vidura, was born to a sudra woman. There are many stories in Upanishads were a Brahmana seeks out a Kshatriya King for spiritual instruction.

I am a Hindu and what does this all mean to me?

If you are a Hindu,  make sure to ask yourself what motivates you to be in the religion. All answers are right. Whatever the answer is,  try to stay true to that motivation until it shifts naturally.  It will be possible to shift the motivations to higher levels in time by simply being aware of one's own motivations and letting them evolve consciously.

Have a great religious life!

Valentine's Day Thoughts: What I remember from my wedding

It has been more than two decades but sweet memories of a wonderful day still linger. Apart from the happiness of family reunion and excitement of new relationships, few other aspects of the day are still fresh in mind. 

Hindu weddings, especially those in the traditions followed by the Brahmin community, can be extremely elaborate stretching over two days. I had probably spent a good six hours in front of the smoking sacrificial fire and uttered many mantras that I hardly knew the meaning of. Boy, how I wish I knew that would be the easiest part of married life :-)

Looking back, out of the many rituals that we had performed, few of them stand out to me as having been most meaningful. Many Hindu rituals have great meanings encoded within them, unsaid but left for us to discover on reflection. Here are some from my reflections:

1. Agni - God of Fire as witness: The marriage was solemnized by the God of Fire, symbolizing that as long as he stood in our body, this commitment that we were making that day would be honored
2. Vastra - Giving of attire:  We both gave each other our dresses that we wore for the ceremony. The dress is a symbol of our character and our values since it is through them that we present ourselves to the society. When we  gave each other the dress to wear, what we were symbolically doing was accepting each other's values into our lives. Isn't it true that only those marriages where the couple share the same core values last?
3. Haara - Garlanding: This  was not a quick exchange of garlands but an elaborate ceremony that involved exchanging at least three different kinds of garlands and also the challenge of reaching out to each other as we were often lifted up in air by the immediate family! This ceremony symbolized the adoration we held for each other that day. Some of that adoration may have worn out in the many years since, but I still think the core appreciation we had for each other has lingered.
4. Maangalya- The 'thaali' and tying of knot: This is one ceremony that every single  culture in India have adopted, irrespective of religion and geographical diversity, the Mangalya Sutra, the talisman on the necklace called 'Thaali', had two shiva linga shaped lockets in it, This to me where the  core of our hearts united on one string, When I tied that string around her neck, I was entrusting to her this great symbol of our union for safe keeping, close to her heart.
5. Saptapadi - The walking of seven steps: The tips of our dresses were tied together and holding her hand, I led her around the sacrificial fire taking an important first seven steps  of our journey together in life. Why seven? Because there are seven things that we had committed to share with each other: what we see, hear, smell, taste, touch, feel and think. This symbolic ritual meant a commitment to maintain total transparency with each other, another major aspect of marriages that last.
6. Akshathai - Receiving of blessings: It is a custom to handover a little raw rice, colored yellow in turmeric and a small piece of flower to every person elder to us among those who had come to the wedding. They sprinkled these on our bowed heads at the end of ceremony as a symbol of showering their blessings. A good starting lesson that our life is not necessarily made by just the effort of two of us but also the graceful support we have received from our families and friends

Next time you are in a Hindu wedding, watch closely. You may find more!

A dialogue with Death (Based on Kathopanishad)

Death and after-life are definitely two of  the most sensitive but extremely intriguing subjects of interest in both religion and philosophy. Since there are no definite scientific or factual information available about what death is or what may happen after death,  the subject has naturally become a fertile ground for wild speculations and blind assertions. Tapping into this uncertainty, various religions have for many centuries enforced morality and follower-ship in society based on promises of heaven for adherence and punishments of hell for deviance. Epicureans in the West and followers of Chaarvaaka in India had taken to the opposite extreme of living an amoral life because they believed Death is an end in itself. The truth, as usual, lies somewhere in-between. Where exactly? Let's see what the Upanishads have to say about it.

Fundamental to the question about Death is the consideration whether there is a soul that occupies the body during life and leaves it after death. The Hindu religion firmly believes that there is a soul that has an association with the body during life. It also believes that death is the ending of an association of the soul with one body and the beginning of its association with another body. Some texts talk about a period between death and rebirth during which the soul enjoys the merits of its good deeds in heaven or the world of manes and suffers for bad deeds in hell. One thing that has been positivelly asserted across different texts is that the soul, other than that of a liberated person, will have a rebirth at some point of time following death, carrying with it the vaasana (the tendencies or inclinations of the soul based on the impressions left on it by experiences)  and karma (potential for undergoing certain experiences based on past actions) from previous life.

There is an extensive treatment of the subject of Death and after-life, in the texts of the Kathopanishad and Brihadaaranyakopanishad.  In addition to talking  about the soul's journey etc. the Upanishads, more interestingly, also offer  a deeper perspective from an entirely different philosophical plane, discussing the nature of reality.

In the Kathopanishad, we find the story of this young boy Nachiketa who was unintentionally given as an offering to Lord of Death, Yama, by his father during a sacrificial ritual. To fulfill the words of his father, Nachiketa finds his way to the abode of Yama to meet the Lord of Death.  Very pleased with the innocence and commitment of this young boy and also as a compensation for having made him wait for three days without food, Yama offers him three boons to choose. With the first boon, Nachikata seeks favorable disposition with his father on his return to earth. With the  second boon, he seeks instructions of a sacrificial ritual with the potential benefit of near-permanent stay in heaven after death. And, finally with the third boon, he asks the question,

'yeyam prete vichikitsaa manushyai

astityeke naayamastiticheke

etad vidyaam anusishta tvayaaham..'  Kathopanishad Canto 1, Mantra  20

"On the departing of the soul, a doubt arises among the humans whether 'It' exists or does not exist. I would like to be instructed by you (on the truth about this)"

As profound as it is, there is a lack of clarity in the question as Nachiketa does not make it clear whose existence he is inquiring into. Most of the commentators have assumed that the question is about the soul's existence beyond death. That is an easy conclusion to arrive at  but not necessarily very sound one because in the previous boon,  Nachiketa was already seeking the way for soul to reach heaven after death. If he was in doubt of soul's existence after death, he would not have sought that? And, remember that Nachiketa is supposedly speaking to the God of Death whose very duty is to direct the souls to where they should reach based on their actions in past life!  Moreover, Yama warns Nachiketa that this is a question that even the celestial beings of yore are not certain of the answer. So, we will need to assume that the question is much deeper than mere validation for the existence of soul.

I am of the opinion that Nachiketa's question is not whether soul exists after death but whether this world that was left behind by the soul, exists anymore from the perspective of the soul, after death. In other words, how real is this reality that we take for granted while living? At death, did the person die or did this world die to the person, just as a dream world would die to the dreamer at the end of a dream?

After a brief exchange of words with Yama, who fails to compel Nachiketa to back off with promises of all the riches of the world etc., Nachiketa digs in further, offering a clarification to his question:

'anytra dharmaat antra adharmaat

anyatra kritaa akritaat

anytra bhutaascha bhavyasch

yathad pasyati tad vada'  (Kathopanishad Canto 2, Mantra 14)

"Tell me about whatever is that you perceive to be beyond good and evil, transcends what is done and what is not done,  and is apart from whatever is in the past as well as future"

Nachiketa now makes it clear that what he is seeking to know about is what transcends the limitations of the world in terms of cause and effect, time and the considerations of good and evil. The key question, again, is not whether there is life after death but if there is a different and true reality for the soul where both life and death become equally irrelevant. It is quite doubtful if there is any question greater than this asked anywhere in the entire Upanishad literature! The closest parallel I can point to, though an imperfect comparison, is the quest of Neo in the Hollywood movie Matrix. (Not that you should  turn to Hollywood for giving you  life's philosophy  but Matrix was a good one)

Kathopanishad, through Yama, answers the first question about soul's perception of world's reality in these poetic words:

yathaadarso thadaatmani

yathaa swapne thadaa pithru loke

yathaapsu pareeva daddhruse thadaa gandharva loke

chaayaa taporiva brahma loke                       (Kathopanishad Canto 2 Chapter 6 Mantra 4)

"(The soul's experience of reality is ) like a reflection on mirror in the mind (on earth), like a dream in the world of manes, like the reflection in water in the world of Gandharvas and like light and shadow in the world of Brahma"

Depending on the levels of self-awareness, the granularity of distinction perceived by the soul changes. In the day-to-day world where we are highly individualistic, the world is full of divisions and everything is colored by our projections on it. When we broaden the picture and become one with our family or fellow beings (with the view that we are all of same origin), the world is less distinctive as in a dream. When we lose ourselves in music or dance or art or other aesthetics, the world again is lesser distinctive like the reflection of everything in same water. In the highest level of self-awareness as in meditation, the world is like a light and shadow projection, devoid of distinctiveness and specificity. Irrespective, in any state of awareness the world is still a reflection, devoid of true reality!

Sri Aaadi Sankaraachaarya says in the beginning words of the Dakshinaamurthy Stotram:

"viswam darpana drisyamaana nagari tulyam nijaanthargatham

 pasyannaatmani maayayaa bahirivo bhutair yadaa nidrayaa"

"(The soul perceives) the world like a city reflected in a mirror within It, and experiences the illusion of the image projected external to it, as in a dream"

If the world is devoid of true reality, what then is Real? The Lord of Death answers in one brief sentence, "The true Reality is called OM". To understand why Yama says it is 'Om' we will need to look at the symbol of OM.

(picture courtesy: www.in.com)

Here is the way I like to look at this symbol of OM.(Not necessarily the only way). The top semi-circular half of OM (top half of the '3') is the future. The bottom half is the past. And where the future and past meet, i.e., the present, that is where the soul experiences the world. The soul is the curve to the right, meeting the present and curving into itself. The single dot on the top is the Brahman and its effulgence that illuminates consciousness is the crescent below it. The darkness between the crescent and the soul is the Unmanifest, or Avyakta. And to me, this is the briefest depiction of the concept of reality as explained in the entire Vedic philosophy!

So, what is the instruction for Nachiketa?

angushta maatra purushontaraatma

sadaa janaanaam hridaye sannivishta

tam svachariraat pravruhen munchaadive ishikaa dhairyena

tam vidyaat sukram amritam tam vidyaat sukram amritam iti  (Kathopanishad Canto 3 Chapter 3 Mantra 16)

"The indwelling self that is of the size of thumb, is seated all the time in the hearts of beings. Separate Him diligently from rest of the body as one would remove the stalk of Munja grass (from its outer shell). Him you should know as pure and deathless. Him you should know as pure and deathless"

Do not concern yourself with death and after-life and instead of focus on realizing that divinity which is within you and is your true nature. This in a nutshell is the instruction of Kathopanishad.