BEGINNINGS OF BHAKTI MOVEMENT

         SAINTS  WILL  AID

         BEGINNINGS OF BHAKTI                      MOVEMENT

The Bhagavatam records that the Bhakti movement  originated in the Dravida Desa.

Utpanna Dravide Saaham
Vriddhim Karnatake gatha
Kwachitkwachin Maharashtre
Gurjare jeernataam gatha.       Mahatmyam, 1.48

I was born in Dravida (Tamil) Desa. I grew up in Karnataka area. I attained glory in some places in Maharashtra. I reached old age in Gurjara (Gujarat).This is recorded as revealed by Bhakti, appearing as a lady, to Narada. 

This appears to tally with the historical perspective, as it is understood. The earliest record we have of a mass movement of pure devotion to Bhagavan in historical times seems to be the phenomenon of the rise of the Nayanmars and Alwars- the devotees of Shiva and Vishnu, respectively, in Tamil land. Greek sources record the existence of the cult of Krishna-Vasudeva at the time of Alexander's invasion. But that does not appear to be a separate bhakti movement, with characteristics we associate with it later on.

The Avataars. Victoria and albert Museum, London.

We will also have to look at it from the Indian perspective of cyclical time. The four yugas, which repeat themselves, have significant internal differences within them. In the Krita or Satya yuga, the means of Liberation were meditation. People were basically good, had long life and had to engage in arduous meditation for years for Realization. We see such stories recorded in the Puranas. In the next, it was Yajna: we see various kinds of yajna. In the Dwapara, it was resort to worship of archa murtis, visit to temples, pilgrimages,etc. In the scriptures it is clearly stated that none of this will work in Kali yuga where the only means of spiritual Realisation will be remembrance of the names of God and their chanting.It is not that other forms of devotion will all disappear totally, but they will be followed as mere formalities, with the real spirit lacking. Kali yuga started with the departure of Lord Krishna from earth around 4000BC. It is significant that the Greeks noted the existence of the cult of Krishna-Vasudeva in the areas which they invaded. The Veda contains lot of prayers (Suktas) to various Deities, but it did not advocate devotion  as the main method of Realisation. This is definitely a post-Krishna phenomenon and there is some justification in the Bhakta-Bhagavata tradition claiming special kinship with Krishna worship. It is also significant that even the main Vedic ritualistic orthodoxy has incorporated Rama-Krishna factor in the performance of Vedic rituals. The Bhagavad Gita is the real source of Bhakti cult, for Bhakti in the form of total surrender to God is the ultimate message of the Gita, whatever may be the interpretation of Pundits and some Acharyas. Subsequently, other schools have risen, advocating devotion based on other Deities.

Nayanmars:
Appar :    580-650 AD
Jnanasambandha: 640-656
Sundarar : 8th Century
Manikkavachaka: 9th Century.

 The four main Nayanmars: Sambandha, Appar. Sundaramurty, Manickavachaka. 
This picture is from a temple in Helensburgh, NSW, Australia.

Images of some Nayanmaars from Tirukazhukunram.

Alwars:
Poigai Alwar: 7th Century
Boodattalvar:  7th
Tirumazhisai:  7th
Tiruppaan Alwar : 8th century
Tirumangai Alwar: 730-800
Kulasekhara Alwar: 8th
Tondaradippodi  : 8th
Nammalvar:  745-780
Periyalwar :  800-885
Andal        : Later half of 9th century
Madhurakavi: 9th Century

Care: There are many traditions about these dates, some going back to even 3000BC!

Group of the Ten alwars.

After the 9th century, there is a big vacuum, we cannot account for. But we see the bhakti cult rising in Maharashtra, North, Bengal and Orissa, and in Karnataka and Andhra , thus encircling the whole country between the 14th and 18th Centuries-but leaving Tamil area alone! Not that there were no individual practitioners of devotion; there certainly were figures like Ramanuja,Appayya Dikshita, Arunagirinatha, etc But they  (except Arunagirinatha)were primarily philosophers and theologians. Pure bhakti movement we see again only after the rise of Nama Siddhanta in the 17th Century.

The Nayanmars rose mainly in response to the challenge posed by the rise of Buddhists and Jains, who kept the Tamil Kings under their spell, by foul means and fair; these were basically advocates of Nastika (Niriswara and anti-Vedic) views which adversely affected the general belief of the common people in God, temple worship, practice of Vedic rituals, etc. So, these 4 Saivite Acharyas travelled extensively, visited almost all the temples, revived devotional worship, instilled faith in Vedic learning and rituals and also succeeded in weaning away the kings from the Nastika faiths. They sang hymns extempore in each temple or holy place, they sang in Tamil, without interfering with the established systems of worship, so that in due course, their hymns came to be recited in the temples as part of the ritual. The hymns were set to specific tunes which were based on the ancient musical traditions. The hymns were mainly paeans of praise, recalling the various puranic incidents, recounting the glory of Lord Shiva and his sports (leela) with devotees and others.As a result of their efforts, Buddhism and Jainism completely lost their hold on princes and people.

The Alwars followed a similar course based on devotion to Vishnu and His Avatars . Ramanuja especially made an effort to bring Non-brahmins into the fold of orthodoxy. He stressed the doctrine of 'Prapatti' or complete surrender as the way. 

But unfortunately, rivalry developed between the two sects and it has continued to this day.

The main body of Smarta brahmins continues to keep its distance from both these sects, though worshipping both Deities without distinction. The overwhelming majority of the common people continues to be outside these sects, worshipping mainly local gods and goddesses, and fostering folk traditions. 

Thus in the Tamil area, bhakti movement has not covered every one, even though the Nayanars and Alwars sang in Tamil! (But their Tamil cannot be understood  today even by most 'educated' Tamils without commentary or explanation! Such is the advance made in Tamil education!) Those who try to dilute our scriptures to suit the modern taste for intellectual ease and indulge in secular translation should keep this in mind. People will not take up religion only on the basis of language. And a true Hindu can never forget that all our original ideas and sources are in/from Sanskrit. No translation can be a substitute for reading the Ramayana/ Gita/ Bhagavatam in the original. We do not read the Ramayana only for or as a story. It has been summed up in one sloka, if one needs only the story. Both Saivites and Vaishnavites claim that their Acharyas have rendered Veda in Tamil (It is claimed that Sambandhar's hymns are a Tamil rendering of Rig Veda; the Vaishnavites say: 'Vedam Tamizh seida maaran Sadagopan'.) But can they be understood or allusions explained without reference to the Sanskrit original? Without Sanskrit, there is no Hindu religion.Tirumurugatruppadai, the Sangam classic of Nakkirar records that one face of Lord Muruga protects the yajnas performed by the Brahmins without deviating from the Mantra rules:"Oru mukham Mantra vidiyin marabuli vazhaa andanar velvi orkkumme".(Lines 94-96, Tirucheeralaivai) Since the Asuras usually try to interfere with the proper performance of Yajnas, two arms of the Lord are ever ready, holding the Spear and the Shield, to protect the Yajna (line 110).

The second time Bhakti movement  spread was only after the rise of the Nama siddhanta . But in spite of its popular and egalitarian elements, it was taken up only by the orthodox sections (mainly Smartas), who could no more practice their orthodox ways under the changing social and economic conditions. This shows that you can take the horse to water (or vice versa) but you cannot make it drink.

Many saints appeared in the North to combat the Muslim threat, but a similar phenomenon is not seen in the South! Here, people simply removed their Deities from temples and hid them elsewhere, fearing Muslim invasion and plunder.

An off shoot of this movement was the rise of Sampradaya Bhajan tradition., drawing largely from the Marathi example, due to the influence of the Maratha rule in Tanjore. This is really a splendid achievement, combining Nama chanting, good music, adapting hymns from all languages without distinction, and equally covering all Deities without distinction! The tradition also honours all Gurus and devotees from all areas! To listen to a good quality traditional bhajan is a moving religious experience, akin to a dip in all holy Tirthas and visit to all major temples. To go through and study their compilation of literature is such a rewarding religious, aesthetic and intellectual exercise. It will make a literate Hindu an educated one- educated in our itihasa-purana, sacred lterature, lives of saints and devotees, etc. It will make him a truly cultured  complete Indian, not a mere money-making  and bread earning  and consuming  economic machine or animal.

Sri Bodhendra who initiated the Namasiddhanta and Sankirtana tradition in the Chola Desa in the Tamil area.

But the Nama Siddhanta or Sampradaya Bhajan tradition is not a free-for-all show.It too is based on some orthodox  elements and practices. It too involves discipline. It takes for granted a certain type of family atmosphere and living tradition.  With secular education spreading like wild fire and engulfing the whole society,  with Brahmin community having lost its traditional bases of support, and having given up its self-discipline; and with each generation in need of educational qualification along secular lines to secure a livelihood, with more and more girls taking to secular education, professional career and modern living style; with decline of Brahmin neighbourhoods which lent support to common cultural practices, with the collapse of even the larger family and support to elders, with the spread of the habit of TV watching like an addiction even among the elderly,  all traditional systems are gradually declining.  Our ladies cannot even sing simple Arati songs at home functions. How many youngsters sing songs at Kolu during Navaratri? You will notice few youngsters in a bhajan or Harikatha performance. The proportion of youngsters in population is rising, but increasing numbers of them are getting alienated from our tradition-of any sort. What is it all leading to?

WHO SAVED HINDUS FROM MUSLIM EXPANSION?

        SAINTS  WILL  AID

        Who Saved Hindus From Muslim           Expansion?

History studies what happened in society.Society includes various aspects -politics, economics, social , cultural and religious developments. But in view of the narrow specialisation that has taken place, each aspect is studied separately- there is economic history, social history, religious history, cultural history, etc  but 'history' in general means just political history. Students of history are not aware of the developments in other areas.

History is written by people with vested interest. Usually it is written by victors and dominant power groups. In the case of India, our history was written by the English colonialists to suit their interest and taught through the govt-sponsored school system. And since school education was necessary for employment, the system ensured that almost every Indian going through  schooling was fully indoctrinated with the govt version of what happened in the name of history. And since education stops for most people with schooling, this version of history becomes the standard for the whole society. Aryan invasion theory is one such fabrication promoted by the British and still taught in schools, at least in Tamil Nadu, with the tenacity of a crocodile! ( Know the Tamil proverb: mudalaiyum moorkanum kondadu vidaa ie the crocodile and the idiot will not leave what they catch ?)

Mughal army under Akbar slaying Sannyasis at Thaneswar. That was how liberal Akbar was! Rascal. The source of this painting is Abul Fazl- not any Hindutva advocate!

After Independence, the govt. of Nehru (who was more an Englishman than Indian by temperament, training and mental make-up) continued with the administration, judicial and educational systems left by the British. After Nehru, one more distortion took place. The new-fangled secularists did not want the stark realities of Muslim invasion of India, and the accompanying destruction of life and property, forced conversions and massacre of Hindus and others to be known. So they undertook revision of our history to suit their agenda through  agencies such as NCERT, CBSE etc. and 'sanitised' our history, portraying the Muslim period in favourable light, with political motives.The result is that by and large, our people do not know all that happened in  India  after Muslims started invading.The Internet today makes mockery of such infantile methods of controlling information.But if you want a university degree to get a job, you have to subscribe to officially sponsored falsehood or filtered facts.

The first wave of Muslim invaders was Arabs  who conquered Sind (then part of India) in 711AD during the Second Caliphate, within 80 years after the death of prophet Mohammad- that is how fast Islam expanded.  From then on up to around 1000,they controlled the North West and gradually spread from there. They were somewhat tolerant, and allowed the Hindus to live as  usual, but gradually they got converts. By 1000 AD, a wave of Turks came, with Mahmud of Gazni. They were plunderers and looters, and destroyed thousands of temples and killed thousands of Hindus and Buddhist monks. Mahmud of Gazni invaded India 17 times between 1000 and 1026, destroying the famous Somnath temple on his 16th invasion in 1025, and looting its fabulous wealth. Gradually Turks established themselves in Delhi and ruled from there till 1526 when they were conquered by the third wave of Muslims- this time Mughals under Babar, a descendant of both Genghis Khan and Timur. (Popularly, we refer to Muslims as 'tulukkans' which is a corruption of the word Turk) Their rule lasted nominally, till the British captured and imprisoned Bahadur Shah Zafar, the last Mughal ruler in Mandalay, in 1858, though their glory had ended long before that.

Islam preached equality but believed in monotheism.Hinduism was stratified, but gave full freedom to its adherents to believe in any God or any number of them, any theology, any philosophy, adopting any method! This baffled and agitated the Muslims. Though there were really learned and spiritually inclined among them, and even evolved a new style of Islam like Sufism, they were generally intolerant and proselytising. All of them were expanding-some peacefully and gradually, others violently and fast, but expansion of Islam was their only goal, as it is part of their religious tenet, conferring Heavenly rewards. This is why Hindu society was under seige and constant pressure and threat under the muslims: they even had to pay a tax, Jizia, to remain Hindus, but accepting the Muslim rule! No Hindu ruler was strong enough to reconquer an area once taken by the Muslims! Only, some like Vijaynagar kings and Shivaji were able to stop further muslim expansion.

Who helped Hindus in those turbulent centuries? Though we may owe allegiance to the orthodox Mutts, we must remember that no orthodox Mutt could help the Hindus, especially the common people. Vijaynagar owed allegiance to Sringeri, and it protected the South for two centuries.Then Shivaji and his successors offered protection for another 150 years, but the Hindu Mutts did pretty little directly. They were themselves struggling for their existence.

It was only the Saints, who deviated from orthodoxy and preached Bhakti , uniting all the castes of Hindus in  common devotion to the two Avatars-Rama and Krishna - who served the Hindus and saved India.

To even look at the names of the Saints is impressive:

1.Jnaneswar 1275-1296   Mahratta. Wrote commentary on Bhagavad Gita in Marathi, which is studied reverently even today.This is considered a first- the first time a Scripture was commented upon in a language other than Sanskrit.

2.Namdev 1270-1350  Propagated reliance on Divine name as the sure way to Liberation.

3.Ramanand 1299-1410 Porpagated Bhakti cult. Was the Guru of Kabirdas.

4.Narsinh Mehta 1414-1481: Propagated Bhakti through devotional singing in Gurjara desa -Gujarat. His song 'Vaishnava jan to' was made famous by Gandhi.

By Nileshbandhiya (Own Work) CC BY-SA 3.0 Creative commons via Wikimedia Commons.HTML

5.Purandaradasa: 1484-1564: Propagated bhakti through singing divine names; considered Pitamaha of Carnatic music; his compositions, though full of divine fervour, are not structured like later kirtanas.

6.Chaitanya Mahaprabhu1486-1534: Initiator of the definite cult of devotion to Krishna as the Supreme. He popularised the group chanting and singing of the following chant as the Mahamantra to secure complete spiritual benediction: 

Hare Krishna Hare Krishna Krishna Krishna Hare Hare
Hare Rama Hare Rama Rama Rama Hare Hare.

7. Mira Bai 1498-1557 Oh, what to say of her! She is Gopi come back, this time as a princess! Pure devotion personified!

8.Tulsi Das1497-1623 Wrote Ram Charit Manas in the regional dialect Awadh, gave hope and saved thousands of Hindus from conversion.

9. Tukaram1577-1650 Continued the bhakti tradition of the earlier Mahratta saints.His Abhangs are fabulous.

10.Samarth Ramadas1609-1681 He was the force and spirit behind Shivaji to establish Swaraj of the Hindus. Effectively combated and stopped muslim expansion, and united the people in devotion to Rama, with Hanuman as the focus.

11.Bhadrachala Ramdas1620-1680. Famous for his renovation of Rama temple at Bhadrachalam using the Sultan's funds, for which he suffered imprisonment for 14 years. Rescued by Rama and Lakshmana personally at the end, the Sultan,Tani Shah also had the Darshan of Rama! He was the ideal of Sri Tyagaraja whom he calls "dhirudau"- the heroic.

Saints of the Cauvery Delta

12.Sadhashiva Brahmendra: 17th century. Active in the Cauvery delta area( Chola Desa) Great advocate of bhakti.His kirtans are the essence of Vedanta and bhakti and a great favourite of bhajan practitioners.

13.Bodhendra d.1692  59th Pontiff of Kanchi Mutt, but the Initiator of NAMA SIDHANTA , with emphasis on Taraka nama as the way to Liberation in our age.

It is not clear to what extent he acted individually and not as the Pontiff. It is to be noted that the Kanchi Mutt has not accepted his line, but continued to follow orthodoxy, which Bodhendra established as being unsuitable for our times on the basis of Sastric injunctions. 

14.Sridhara Ayyaval 1635-1720  Contemporary of Bodhendra,great advocate of Nama Siddhanta, emphasising Siva Nama, but advocating Siva-Rama abhedam.

15.Narayana Tirtha1650-1745 Advocate of Nama Siddhanta, devotional singing and the author of Krishna Lila Tarangini, an important item in Sampradaya bhajans.

16.Sadguru Swami 1776-1817 Continued Nama Siddhanta and initiated numberless devotees in Mantra japa.

17.Sri Tyagaraja 1767-1847 Formalised singing divine names and glories through classical music; performed Rama Nama Japa 96 crore times after taking proper inititation as laid down in the Upanishad and completed it in 21 years. Had Darshan of Rama. Lived by unchavritti, shunning all wealth, and name and fame.

Tyagaraja is usually portrayed with a grim face, as if he has swallowed some bitter medicine. Face is the index of the mind. "Sukhi evvaro Rama summukhi evvaro " , sang Tyagaraja. One who has enjoyed the bliss of the divine name ought to be portrayed with a face showing Ananda! 

There are others like Vemana, Potana, Jayadeva who are great devotees individually but whose social role is not clearly known.

They appeared in all the troubled areas and most of them travelled around and spread the message. To this list, we must include Arunagirinatha also, who lived in the 15th century and advocated devotion, without Siva-Vishnu-Shakti difference.None of them advocated any definite philosophy!

 Just look at the caste of some of the leading figures celebrated in the bhakti movement:

Jnanadev, Tyagaraja, Bodhendra, Sridhara Ayyaval, Sadashiva Brahmendra, Narsinh Mehta, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, Ramdas - were all brahmins.
Namdev- Tailor
Gora Kumbar- Potter
Tukaram- Trader
Savata- Gardener
Narahari- Goldsmith
Chokha Mela- Untouchable
Janabai- maidservant
Sena - Barber
Mirabai- Rajput princess
Kabirdas-weaver-muslim.

We are bound to ask: in the comparative period, how many personalities sprang from the orthodox Mutts to save the common people from falling into the hands of muslims? Even today, what are they doing in that direction? The very fact that they are Hindu mutts has prevented them from speaking on the subject openly. Such is the state of our secularism.

I am not decrying orthodoxy. I am only pointing out the historical fact of how Hindus were saved.

Dr.V.Raghavan  wrote on the Saint-Singer Integrators, a book published by the NBT in the 70s. Sadly, it is no more available.

Dr.V.Raghavan-eminent scholar and exemplar of Hindu culture.
This picture is taken from "Sruti" magazine.
Copyright position not known. I gratefully acknowledge. It was Bhakti- and not Philosophy-which saved Hindus.

NOTE:
I like to provide pictures of the great people I write about as I want our friends to know them- this is the way we convey our respect. It is so difficult to get the photos without copyright hassles. I resort to postage stamps wherever available.
All pictures here taken from the Net and gratefully acknowledged. Used here without any commercial motive, purely for educational purposes.

What does Gita Teach?

        SAINTS  WILL  AID

        WHAT DOES GITA TEACH?

Hinduism abounds in scriptures. This profusion itself becomes a source of confusion. Add to this the commentaries, commentaries on commentaries, glosses on them, translations, interpretations,explanations, etc. It is almost impossible to understand the orignal sense of any important scripture. Each tradition follows the interpretation of its own founder Acharya and his parampara.

The prastanatraya- the Upanishads, Brahmasutra and Bhagavad Gita- are the common foundation of all sects of orthodox Hindus; yet none divides them as much as the prastanatraya! The problem starts with the interpretation of the very first mantra of the first Upanishad, and reaches an intense state in the Gita. 

The problem for the modern Hindu is compounded by many factors. Most do not know Sanskrit, and have to depend upon translations. The accuracy of many of the translations is doubtful and questionable. Authorities who are considered Avataras like Sankara, Jnaneswar, Ramanuja differ among themselves. Most commentators want to establish their own pet theories using the words of the Gita.  Most modern translators and commentators lack spiritual experience, and proceed on the basis of linguistic expertise, without  sraddha or dedication to the subject. We are also influenced by the state of modern education and notions. These factors guarantee that it will be extremely difficult to get at the real meaning of the Gita.

Yet, it need not be difficult at all if we adhere to the basic facts. These are:

• Arjuna is confused about Dharma, and asks Krishna about what is beneficial for him: "yat sreya:"
• Krishna proceeds to tell him on the basis of his own Aryan heritage.
• Krishna first explains what he had taught in the early days- (pura prokta) the ancient wisdom: "Dwivida nishta" viz the twofold path of Jnana  and the path of Karma ie Jnana Yoga and karma yoga , vide 3.3
• He explains many aspects of jnana and karma, how karma is to be performed, what kinds of karma are to be done, karma as yajna, karma as yoga etc.
• He explains many other things in answer to questions asked by arjuna.
• But in the end, while concluding the Gita, Bhagavan says CLEARLY, UNAMBIGUOUSLY:

18.61   Arjuna, the Lord dwells in the hearts of all beings, causing all beings , by His Maya, to revolve, as if mounted on a machine.

18.62. O Bharata, take refuge in Him with all thy heart; by His grace you shall attain supreme peace and the eternal abode.

18.63 Thus has wisdom, more profound than all profundities been declared by Me to you.: "jnanam akhyatam guhyad guhyataram"

18.64  Hear again MY Supreme word, the profoundest of all: "Sarva guhya tamam, Me Paramam Vacha:" Bcause you are dear to Me, I will speak what is good for you.

18.65 Occupy your mind with Me, be devoted to Me, sacrifice to me, bow down to Me. You will reach Me, I promise you. You are dear to Me.

Care: See also: 9.34. The same words are repeated, almost entirely!

18.66 Relinquishing all Dharmas take refuge in Me alone. I will liberate you from all sins. Do not grieve.

Sarva dharman parityajya mam ekam saranam vraja

Aham tva sarva papebhyo mokshayishyami ma shucha:

If after studying all this with attention and devotion, some one talks of anything other than surrender to Bhagavan, as the teaching of the Gita, such as karma yoga, jnana yoga etc, he is a fit candidate for the mental asylum.

In the Gita, Bhagavan extolls all spiritual paths. After all, he himself established even Jnana yoga and karma yoga. But this was the old arrangement: "pura". What is new in the Gita is the revelation about the Avatara, Bhagavan as Brahman,and Surrender to Him as the supreme path. Throughout the Gita, wherever Bhagavan talks of Avatara, Bhagavan, Bhakti, he is qualifying the words with supreme adjectives: In the 9th chapter, Bhagavan talks of "Raja Vidya, Raja Guhyam" ie the king of vidyas and the king of secrets and he talks of Bhakti! He promises: " Na me bhakta: pranasyati" 'My devotee is never destroyed'.  He says in 9. 33: " Anityam asukham lokam imam prapya bhajaswa mam" ie 'having attained this transient, joyless world, you worship Me". Then in 9.34, He says: Fill your mind with Me, be My devotee, sacrifice unto Me, bow down to Me; thus having made your heart steadfast in Me, taking Me as the Supreme Goal, you sahll come to Me.

Again in chapter 13 Bhagavan talks of Purushottama and concludes that chapter by calling it " guhya tamam sastram" ie the sastra that is the highest secret. 

Note: These translations are based on Swarupananda's translation, Advaita Ashrama publication.

Arjuna does not ask for "philosophy", but for a rule of conduct, ie dharma. Sri Krishna  provides just that: give up all ideas and discussions about dharma, but surreneder to Me. So Bhagavan has opened up a new path, has performed bypass surgery, as the arteries of spiritual practice were clogged by empty ritualism in the name of karma, and fruitless discussions in the name of Jnana. In the colophon, Gita is called Upanishad, Brahmavidya and Yogasastra. As Brahmavidya, it tells us the ultimate goal to be attained; as Upanishad, it takes us near that goal; as yogasastra it tells us what to do ie how to achieve it. Then, why waste our time in discussing empty philosophy?

Historically, people have dealt with the Gita in the light of their needs at the time. Tilak and Gandhi interpreted it as mainly Karma Yoga, deriving inspiration for the national movement for freedom. In his days, Sankara was engaged in the fight with purva mimamsakas, trying to establish the superiority of Jnana over karma and he has interpreted the Gita as upholding Jnana. Thus, while giving his comments on sloka 18.66, where Bhagavan says 'give up all dharmas and surrender to Me alone', Sankara makes bold to ask:

"In this scripture, the Gita, has Knowledge been established as the supreme means to Liberation, or is it action, or is it both?"

This question itself is absurd: it states the very problem wrongly. Here, Bhagavan is clearly talking of giving up all karmas (dharma) and surrendering to Him. Where does jnana come in here? Sankara is determined to see what he fancies ie the fight between jnana and karma, and totally misses or completely ignores what Bhagavan actually states!

Further down he states: "Knowledge of the Self, however, is exclusively the cause of the highest good". Now, it is true that jnana is a valid means to liberation. But the Gita nowhere states that that is the "exclusive" ie only cause! If anything, the Gita 's position is : surrender to God alone is the exclusive means! eg. 12.8:

Fix your mind on Me only, place your intellect in Me; then you will do doubt live in Me hereafter.

Again, in 8.7:

Therefore at all times, constantly remember Me and fight.  With mind and intellect absorbed in Me, you shall doubtless come to Me.

Again, 8.16:

O son of Kunti, having attained Me, there is no rebirth.

"Mam upetya tu Kaunteya, punarjanma na vidhyate".

We can cite many more instances. It is plain that here Acharya Sankara is beating his own drum in the name of the Gita. He is pursuing his own agenda. The pity is, he is interpreting it in the light of the past, not as Bhagavan himself says in the Gita. We may respect him, but we are not bound to accept his quirks and slips. 

Even the leading followers of Sankara felt uneasy at this position. Madhusudhana Sarasvati, a leading Advaitin and follower of Sankara was one who felt such unease. He writes in his Gudhartha Dipika:

" what is enjoined in general  for brahmacharins, grahastas, vanaprastas and mendicants is taking shelter under God alone, ignoring the rites and duties even when they stand  enjoined. ...since they may have a love for their own rites and duties , therefore for prohibiting that it is said,' abandoning all forms of rites and duties'......

What is intended to be enjoined is taking refuge in God alone......

 ...since the supreme secret of all the scriptures is verily surrender to God,  therefore the Lord has concluded the scripture (Gita) at that itself. For without that (surrender) even monasticism does not lead to yielding  of its own fruit.

.....the Lord's concern is only with taking refuge in God by ignoring even the duties of monasticism.

However, since streadfastness in devotion to God is the means to both (steadfastness in Action and in Knowledge) and is also the fruit of both, therefore it has been summed up last in ' Abandoning all forms of rites and duties take refuge in Me alone'.

Here Madhusudana Sarasvati confesses his discomfiture with Sankara:

But the Commentator (Sankara) has said that ...steadfastness in Knowledge has been summed up in, 'take refuge in Me alone.' Who are we insignificant people to explain the intention of the Venerable One?

Translations of Sankara and Madhusudana Sarasvati quoted here are from the translations of Swami Gambhirananda, publications from Advaita Ashrama, Calcutta.

In dealing with Tyagaraja, it is necessary to remember all this. Tyagaraja is a smarta, following Sankara. But he is preeminently a bhakta, following the Narada way of bhakti. We see the union of Jnana and bhakti in Tyagaraja, as in Narada, as extolled in Bhagavatam. He does not advocate ritualistic karma. His is an approach of simple devotion, absolute dependence on God as father, mother, guru and God. He has provided the most authentic and practical commentary on the Gita, in his his kritis without formally calling it so! In many respects, he is a forerunner of Sri Ramakrishna!

BEWARE OF INTERPRETERS

              SAINTS WILL AID

              5.  BEWARE  OF INTERPRETERS 

In course of time, the teachings of Sages come to be translated and also interpreted by succeeding generations.  These traslations and interpretations/  commentaries come to acquire more importance than the original texts themselves. In India, these texts are mostly in Sanskrit  in its ancient form. They are intelligible only to those who take time  and pain to learn them; such persons are few at any time. So, very few go to the original sources. 

The authority for Hindu religious/philosophical teaching is the 'Prastanatraya' : Upanishads, Brahmasutras and Bhagavad Gita. All our philosophical systems are based on interpretations of these sources. No Acharya has gone to the Veda, which is the very foundation. An impression has been created that the Veda deals with rituals and that the philosophical ideas are to be found only in the Upanishads, which break away from the rituals. It obscures the fact that the Upanishads are very much part of the Veda, an integral part, and no contradiction is involved betwen the two.

Among the modern Masters we are considering, one fact is clearly noticed. None of them depended on the authority of ancient sources to buttress their teaching, and cited them in support of their teaching. Their teachings are based on their exprience. They may refer to the ancient teachings in their conversations with devotees because the latter were familiar with them, to elucidate a point, but not as proof. Ramana Maharshi used to say clearly that he taught  on the basis of his experience, it is the others who found that it tallied with the old teachings.

This creates complications. Most followers/commentators want to enlist the support of the old authorities, and  interpret the Masters in the light of old teachings, and miss what is new. But those who want to prove the uniqueness or superiority of their chosen masters go to the other extreme, and deny the relevance of the old teachings! The truth is in the middle: No genuine Master is merely a copy or echo of an old one, but they do not break the old system either: they come to fulfil, not to destroy. In the spiritual world, the Truth is One, and as old the Creation! The sages merely explain, highlight aspects according to the needs of the times. This we see clearly demonstrated in the life and teachings of the three modern Masters.All the three Masters accept the authority of Vedanta as the final truth, but none of them has merely echoed or repeated the teaching of any old authority.

Sri Ramakrishna, we saw, stressed the way of Bhakti as shown by Narada as the way to liberation in our age. (We find that the same way is more or less reiterated by Rama to Shabari, by Prahlada  to the Asura children, and by the Yogi to king Janaka in the 11th Skandha of Bhagavatam!) He did not deny the truth of Karma or Jnana, but merely said that in the conditions of the modern world Karma could not be preformed properly as prescribed in the scriptures; and so long as we were conscious of the body, we could not, in all honesty, claim that we could pursue Jnana. So long as we could not get rid of the ego, 'let the rascal remain as the servant of God' he said. Sri Ramakrishna decried no previous school, though he pointed out the risks in following some like Tantra which he did not consider suitable or safe for this age.

This is exactly where Ramana comes in. Is there an ego at all? Is it absolutely true? If you investigate the ego, you find it is not there!  (Ulladu Naarpadu,25)Normally, it is the ego (mind) which goes in search of Truth. It is like the thief  acting as the policeman searching for the thief!  (Talks- 43,238,615) Ramana's method has been called the way of Jnana, but Ramana himself called it self-inquiry. It differs from the classical form: the old method focussed on Brahman, investigating the reality of the world, Ramana's method focusses on finding the source of one's own self ie self attention. People were not wanting in his own time who were wondering whether he taught Vedanta or Siddhanta! Sri Muruganar gave the effective reply: Ramana taught "Ramananta"!

 Scholars wrote commentaries on his works , based on their own beliefs. Once Lakshmana Sarma complained to Bhagavan that some Sanskrit translation did not reflect the original accurately. Bhagavan did not criticise it, but merely said: 'then, why don't you write your own?'  He did, submitted it to Ramana for correction, and Bhagavan did make many changes! But such problems arise only for those who cannot follow the original.  ( Among the many who came to Bhagavan, only Muruganar and Lakshmana Sarma came without any previous knowledge of Vedanta, though they were otherwise learned! They expressed to Bhagavan dfficulty in following the ideas of the Forty Verses. Bhagavan personally taught and explained it to them; they were thus privileged.) 

It is not that Sri Ramakrishna did not talk about or approve of Jnana; he explained it beautifully, but also its difficulty..

"Yes, one may reach Him by following the path of discrimination too; that is calld jnanayoga. But it is an extremely difficult path. i have told you already of the seven planes of consciousness.On reaching the seventh plane the mind goes into samadhi. If a man acquires the firm knowledge that Brahman alone is real and the world illusory, then his mind merges in samadhi. But in the Kaliyuga the life of a man depends entirely on food. How can he have the consciousness that Brahman alone is real and the world illusory?"

"What is jnanayoga? The jnani seeks to realise Brahman. he discriminates, saying ,''Not this,not this'. He discriminates , saying,'Brahman is real and the universe illusory'. He discriminates between the Real and the unreal. As he comes to the end of discrimination, he goes into samadhi and attains the Knowledge of Brahman."

"What is the meaning of jnanayoga? It is the path  by which a man can realise the true nature of his own Self; it is the awareness that Brahman alone is his true nature."

 Or that Sri Ramana did not talk of Bhakti. He always said,'inquire or surrender'; surrender is the last stage of Bhakti- atma nivedanam. In the entire bhakti literature, it is difficult to find more moving Bhakti hymns than the Five Hymns to Arunachala. In over fifty years, Sri Ramana never even once criticised other schools, or taught self-enquiry to any one on his own! Once, Kavyakantha Ganapati Sastri said that Bhagavan prescribed self-enquiry, which was a tall order, for every one, regardless of their preparation or qualifications. Bhagavan merely said he but taught what he " knew or had experinced". He used to explain that ultimately one came to self-enquiry consciously or unconsciously. For instance, Yoga means union; it assumes there is separation! For whom is the separation? It is for me. Then, Who am I?This question has to be faced, and answered in the end by every one on any path! These are explained clearly in the 'Forty Verses'. Sadhu Om has also explained them, based on Bhagavan's teaching alone.

Sri Aurobindo's Yoga is  a predominantly psychological method, what in the olden days used to be called RajaYoga, but broader than that. But it incorporates karma and devotion as well- that is why it is Integral Yoga! Sri Aurobindo's Yoga invokes absolute Divine help for its performance, and is not based on human effort alone.

"It is the lesson of life that always in this world everything fails a man- only the Divine does not fail him, if he turns entirely to the Divine."

"To find the Divine is indeed the first reason for seeking the spiritual Truth and the spiritual life; it is the one thing indispensable and all the rest is nothing without it."

"Yoga is directed towards God, not towards man."

"This yoga demands a total dedication of life to the aspiration for the discovery and embodiment of the Divine Truth and to nothing else whatever." 

 

 He has very clearly enunciated both the differences from and common aspects with the old systems.

"I have never said that my yoga was something brand new in all its elements....it takes up the essence and many processes of the old yogas- its newness is in its aim,standpoint and the totality of its method."

"Why should there be anything new? The object of spiritual seeking is to find out what is eternally true, not what is new in Time."

"I have said that this yoga is "new" because it aims at the integrality of the Divine in this world  and not only byond it and at a supramental realisation. But hoe does that justify a suprior contempt for the spiritual realisation which is as much the aim of this yoga as of any other?"

Sri Aurobindo said his yoga was new as compared with the old because:

• it aims not at a departure out of world and life into heaven or Nirvana, but at a change of life and existence
• the object sought after is not an individual achievement of divine realisation  for the sake of the individual, but something to be gained for the earth-consciousness here
• the method is as total and integral as the aim- the total and integral change of  the consciousness and nature

 

As Sri Aurobindo has himself explained in his statment, his teaching starts from that of the ancient stages, but does not stagnate there. And even while accepting the old teachings, he has gone to the very source- Veda. But in his view, the Vedic rishis aimed at individual perfection,but did not try to make it part of earth-consciousness. The subsequent Rishis tried to state  the Vedic insights in intellectual forms; the later commentators tried to make it more logically rigorous. In this process, some aspects of the original insights were obscured, and resulted in mayavada.. This is what Sri Aurobindo rectified. His method:

• draws attention to the basic insights of the Veda, but aims to make that consciousness part of the earthly life
• regards the world as real, and not as illusion or unreal
• does not advocate running away from the world or renouncing it
• integrates all the human faculties and their methods- will: karma; emotion: devotion, and mind control: Yoga, as such.

The real difference between Sri Aurobindo and all the previous authorities lies in his conception of the nature of the ultimate goal, and what it involves in living.

So far, Sri Aurobindo has largely escaped the labours of 'interpreters'. Or, the interpreters have all been from the 'inside'. However, Sri Aurobindo is one Sage whose main means of communicaton was writing, and he wrote so clearly in English that one who knows English reasonably well  does not need any interpreters: one could always go to him direct. Those who do not know English are surely at a disadvantage. His writings are almost impossible to translate in many languages, and any translation would lose the mantric power of his  original writings. This, those who have read the original writings and translations do clearly experience. 

There is no difficulty at all in studying the teachings of Sri Ramakrishna- they are so clerly stated in the 'Gospel'. Those whose language is Tamil can follow the original writings of Sri Ramana, with a little application; for others competent translations are available. Sri Aurobindo's writings are in English; it appears tough and his style is not something Indians are used to- but it can certainly be read in the original, again with a little application. In no case we need interpreters.

Note: I always quote from the Masters themselves, from authoritative publications from the authentic sources- Sri Ramakrishna Math, Sri Ramanasramam, and Sri Aurobindo Ashram. Sri Aurobindo's writings are extensive and even on a single point, he has expressed himself from many angles. These are brought together in neat compilations. The quotations today are all taken from the publicaton 'The Integral Yoga', Second Impression,1996. Very useful compilations are also made by Dr.A.S.Dalal. 

Victory of the Victorians-2

        POEMS  AND  POETS

       40. VICTORY OF THE VICTORIANS-2

However important colonialism might appear to be for us now, it was not the most important issue for the Victorians. In any case, colonialism was not new and the renewed focus it received was itself due to other factors, which were vastly more important.

These related to various branches of science. In 1830s Charles Lyell published 'Principles of Geology' which proposed that the earth had developed over extended periods of time. Charles Darwin published 'Voyage of the Beagle' in 1839 and 'On the Origin of  Species' in 1859, proposing natural selection  as the basis. But some of his ideas were current even before this time. The idea that species might become extinct in the absence of the right conditions was propounded by Robert Chambers in 1844. But the word 'Darwinism' coined by Thomas Henry Huxley caught on., and was applied to a range of ideas about evolution. Sociologist Herbert Spencer coined the terms 'survival of the fittest' and somehow it got blended with ideas of Darwinism,viz natural selection. By 1870s the idea of "social Darwinism" had gained currency. If it is only a fit species that survives in nature, why not apply this to society?If a society expands, prospers and gains, it is only by its superior nature! In course of time, this served as the basis of Fascism, Nazism and ideas of ethnic cleansing. Renewed interest in Imperialism and its association with ideas of racial superiority was also an off-shoot of this.

But the real effect of these developments on British society was shattering. If the geological findings were true, then the Biblical time-scale ( that the earth was created in 4004 B.C.) was wrong! If the species were propagated by natural selection, the Biblical story of creation was wrong! Thus in one stroke, the foundations of Christianity were shattered. By this time, 'science' had gained respectability as a profession, people had started studying about science in earnest, facilitated by the spread of literacy and print media. No one who was 'educated' could take the Bible seriously. Even earlier, German scholars had questioned the historical basis of the Bible. Faith in organised Christianity was collapsing.

One specific incident  of the times is legendary. The British Association in Oxford convened a meeting in June,1860 to consider the issue of 'evolution'. ( 'On the Origin of Species' had been published by Darwin in 1859). Hundreds of people had gathered. Bishop Wilberforce of Oxford had come prepared to establish the superiority of the Church doctrine. During his speech, he turned to scientist T.H Huxley, and taunted him, asking whether he claimed descent from monkey from his grandfather's or grandmother's side! Huxley did not lose his cool; he explained lucidly and simply the basic ideas involved,  pointed out the ignorance of the Bishop, and concluded by saying that descent from monkey was not so  shameful as  keeping company with people who obscured truth! The crowd overwhelmingly supported Huxley and Wilberforce stood humiliated. You can say this is the public funeral for Christian Faith in the Victorian era. It was indeed Science which was the real victor in the Victorian age!

However, Huxley himself was not an atheist, but only agnostic. (Agnosticism was again a word coined by Huxley himself) One statement of Huxley is worth remembering:

"There is some one kind of matter which is common to all living beings, and that their endless diversities are bound together by a physical as well as an ideal unity"

                                                        Lecture 'On The Physical Basis of Life',1868

Well, this is as much philosophy as science!

These ideas of science had their repercussions in literature. This is the special characteristic of English literature: it responded to each age and was in turn shaped by it. We do not see this in other countries, in India for instance. During the same period, Mughal rule had ended in India; thousands of Muslims had been massacred and hanged in Delhi; the seven old cities of Delhi had been sacked; the old way of life and an entire civilisation was collapsing. But how many literary figures talked about it,wrote about it, sang about it? We find only a Mirza Ghalib writing about those conditions in Gazals and private letters in Urdu which not many people read; but our smart academics have interpreted it as the pessimistic outpourings of one man! Incidentally, it raises questions about the existence of a 'national' political consciousness at this time. Did people at large consider the Mughal ruler as the national king or emperor or Delhi  as the national capital? Then, why has no one written about it in any other language?

But the Victorian loss of Faith in the authority of the Church and the certainty of its teachings is a major element in their literature in all forms. How it affected society is recorded in novels by Dickens; how it affected individual psyche and the inner landscape of man is depicted by Hardy. It becomes a big theme in poetry. We saw how disturbed the Romantics had been  in the aftermath of Newton  and they turned to Nature. But developments in science had disturbed that Nature further, and had knocked faith in God out of reckoning. Where could man now turn to? Gerard Manly Hopkins  tried to reconcile science  somehow with religious feeling, but others were sure that the tide of faith was ebbing out. Mathew Arnold wrote:

DOVER BEACH 1867

The Sea of Faith
Was once, too, at the full, and round earth's shore
Lay like the folds of a bright girdle furl'd;
But now I only hear
Its melancholy, long withdrawing roar,
Retreating, to the breath
Of the night-wind down the vast edges drear
And naked shingles of the world.
.............
.................for the world,which seems
To lie before us  like the land of dreams,
So various, so beautiful,so new,
Hath really neither joy,nor love,nor light,
Nor certitude,nor peace, nor help for pain;
And we are here as on a darkling plain
Swept with confused alarms of struggle and fight,
Where ignorant armies clash by night.



The first part merely records the poet's impression that faith was fading; but the latter part is prescient. It tells us that with loss of faith, there is now no joy,love, or light; certitude is gone, there is confused struggle and fight by ignorant armies. Within 50 years after these lines were written, the nations which tried to  civilise the world , all following the Book, were engulfed in the Great War; and in another 20 years, in the Second World  War. 

Tennyson too captures some of these problems in his poetry.
'The Charge of the Light Brigade' is about the British spirit of conquest, "theirs not to reason why, theirs but to do and die", sort of obeying the dictat of the times. 'Ulysses' (1833) is a song of the spirit of the times, of unending voyage and conquest: 
 "To follow knowledge like a sinking star,
    Beyond the utmost bound of human thought."

But where would it all lead to? Human thought had no bounds at all and in the words of Macaulay:

"A point which was invisible yesterday is its goal today, and will be its starting point tomorrow."

Extend it , and it becomes invisible in turn! Science makes everything uncertain! So what could man make of life? Darwin's  theory of origin of species was published in 1859, but the ideas were current before that. It was believed that Nature was concerned with whole species and not about the preservation of the individuals  and that even whole species had suffered extinction .(Georges Couvier, 1769-1832)This thought must have disturbed the faithful. Tennyson was surely seized of the matter. In his long poem In Memoriam, he takes up the issue:

IN MEMORIAM   (55)

Are God and Nature then at strife,
     That nature lends such evil dreams?
        So careful of the type she seems,
So careless of the single life,

That I, considering everywhere
     Her secret meaning in her deeds,
     And finding that of fifty seeds
She often brings but one to bear,

I falter where I firmly trod,......

56


"So careful of the type?" but no.
     From scarped cliff and quarried stone
      She cries, A thousand types are gone;
 I care for nothing, all shall go.

"Thou makest thine appeal to me.
     I bring to life, i bring to death;
     The spirit does mean but the breath:
  I know no more." And he, shall he,

Man, her last work, who seem'd so fair.
     Such splendid purpose in his eyes,
      Who roll'd the psalm to wintry skies,
Who built him franes of fruitless prayer,

Who trusted God was love indeed
     And love Creation's final law-
     Tho' Nature, red in tooth and claw
 With ravine, shriek'd against his creed-

Who loved, who suffer'd countless ills,
     Who battled for the True, the Just,
      Be blown about the desert dust,
Or seal'd within the iron hills?

No more? A monster then, a dream,
     A discord. Dragons of the prime
     That tare each other in their slime,
Were mellow music match'd with him.

O life as futile, then, as frail!
     O for thy voice to soothe and bless!
     What hope of answer, or redress?
Behind the veil,behind the veil.

What hope is there for man then? Other species had come and gone before him, so he too shall go!

There rolls the deep where grew the tree.
     O earth, what changes have thou seen!
     There where the long street roars hath been
The stillness of the central sea.

The hills are shadows, and they flow
     From form to form, and nothing stands;
     They melt like mist, the solid lands,
Like clouds they shape themselves and go.       (123)

Scientific knowledge has supplanted faith, but has given nothing but doubt and uncertainty. Each new discovery brings a new level of uncertainty, more profound doubt. So, Tennyson makes a simple U-turn and comes back to faith!

O, yet we trust that somehow good
     Will be the final goal of ill,......

That nothing walks with  aimless feet,
     That not one life shall be destroy'd,
     Or cast as rubbish to the void,
When God hath made the pile complete;

Behold, we know not anything;
     I can but trust that good shall fall
     At last- far off- at last,to all,
And every winter change to spring.

'In Memoriam' was written over many years, but published  in 1850. The ideas do not run in a straight line, but the passages written at different periods do reflect the poet's varying ideas and reactions about science, till he is so thoroughly disillusioned that only a return to simple faith could satisfy him. This he states clearly at the beginning:

Strong son of God, immortal Love,
     Whom we, that have not seen thy face, 
     By faith, and faith alone, embrace'
Believing where we cannot prove;

Thine are the orbs of light and shade;
     Thou madest Life in man and brute;
     Thou madest Death; ....

Thou wilt not leave us in the dust:
     Thou madest man, he knows not why,
     he thinks he was not made to die;..

Our little systems have their day;
     They have their day and cease to be;
     They are but broken lights of thee,
And thou, O Lord, are more than they.

We have but faith: we cannot know,
     For knowledge is of things we see;
     And yet we trust it comes from thee,
A beam in darkness, let it grow.

Let knowledge grow from more to more,
     But more of reverence in us dwell;
     That mind and soul, according well,
May make one music as before,

But vaster.

Strong statement of faith, expressing the hope that knowledge and faith will be reconciled in a vaster harmony. But that was not to be. As the century advanced, science made steady inroads into the both human intellect and heart. Faith was completely disowned by the educated class. But the poem is pervaded by a  strong sense of  doubt . Personally I like the assessment of T.S.Eliot  best:

"  It happens now and then that a poet by some strange accident  expresses the mood of his generation, at the same time that he is expressing a mood of his own which is quite remote from that of his generation.......Tennyson himself on the conscious level......consistently asserted a convinced, if somewhat sketchy, Christian belief......he had a good deal the temperament of the mystic- certainly not at all the mind of the theologian....Tennyson is distressed by the idea of a mechanical universe.......(but) The hope of immortality is confused (typically of the period) with the hope of the gradual and steady improvement of this world........an interesting compromise between the religious attitude, and what is quite a different thing, the belief in human perfectibility...... 
It is not religious because of the quality of its faith, but because of the quality of its doubt."
                         From: The Selected Essays of T.S.Eliot,1932

But we must note one fact. 19th Century science triumphed over organised Christian teaching- Christian theology based ideas of creationism. It did not mean Science had disproved Religion as such. Religion is more than Christianity, and their infantile ideas of Biblical creation are not the last word on the subject. But as the century advanced the fact of science V.Christian theology was presented as Science V. Religion as such; it is this notion which holds the common mind even now, even in Asia.It was scepticism, agnosticism which triumphed at the end of the Victorian age, dyed in stark intellectual colours and clothed in powerful and attractive labels and formulae. This is the ultimate victory of the Victorian Age. In this light, it has not yet ended. Whatever might be advances in astro-physics or particle physics or in other areas, it is the 19th century ideas which still run the establishment.

Note: The idea that nature favours groups over individuals for preservation is not new to us Indians. There is the well known passage in the Mahabharata which says that an individual can be sacrificed for  the  family, the family for the village, village for the country etc. I think the Greek story of Iphigenia and Agamemnon too illustrates this point!