dharmashastra - the truth behind my dharma

What's in a name?

noreply@blogger.com (ck2) — Mon, 26 Sep 2011 03:29:00 +0000

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

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

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

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

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

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

Oru Jati, Oru Matham, Oru Daivam Manushyanu

noreply@blogger.com (ck2) — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 23:19:00 +0000

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bhaja Govindam - Verse 2

noreply@blogger.com (ck2) — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 07:30:00 +0000

Bhaja Govindam
Verse 2

मूढ जहीहि धनागमतृष्णां
कुरु सद्बुद्धिं मनसि वितृष्णाम् |
यल्लभसे निजकर्मोपात्तं
वित्तं तेन विनोदय चित्तं ||

modha jahehi dhanagamatrishnam
kuru sadbudhim manasi vitrishnam
yalabhase nijakarmopatham
vitham tena vinodaya chitham

oh, fool! give up your insatiable desire for earthly possessions;
be sensible and develop serenity and contentment.
be satisfied and happy with whatever you may earn by the sweat of your brow
and whatever has destiny marked for your lot.

In the second verse of the Bhaja Govindam, sung by Adi Shankara, tells us to give up our thirst for wealth and other earthly possessions. This desire creates a vicious cycle that churns forever, taking us to the heights of joy, but equally bringing us to depths of sorrow. He calls us a fool, because only fools bring on suffering to themselves out of ignorance. Fools are also those among us, who believe we are in control of events, specially when things are going well. When the first mishap occurs, all those qualities that one thought they possessed seems to fail us. True happiness comes from renouncing this path or curbing this desire. How? He says clean the mind of these thoughts, the lust for objects, greed for wealth and focus on something else. Something better and real, the ultimate truth.

It all seems so impractical in todays life. How? With all the pressure of the family, work and self, how does one give up small desires? We need to earn to keep our family healthy, and money to pay rent, car, clothes and so many other things. We are quite unsettled when our neighbhour buys a better and bigger car. Or when our colleague wears a Prada watch, as compared to our more sober Indian Titan brand. At home, simple potato chips from a local bakery or shop is no comparison to a packet of Lays. Where does one start? But, think, more importantly where does this all end?

Adi Sankara time was no different. Even if Pepsi, Prada or Titan hadnt setup shop then, the desire and passion to covet and possess was not less in any sense. He gives a way out of this problem, asking us to take baby steps. Shankaracharya says we should begin with contentment, be happy with what we have. That would be sustenance and a little more. We are looking to live happily, and this is not something that can be bought in a store. A ten rupee note, that goes to buy bag of chips, lasts in our hands, hardly for 10 minutes, and in our mouths even less.

Its not easy to swim against the tide. This commentary is not about brands, and even less about the names mentioned here. Brands are created not by a company or a person, but because of the demand to possess something that many others cannot easily covet. So i will buy a brand of lucky jeans for 100$, because i know my friends will probably not buy such an expensive one. My joy will last, till someone from my circle, new or old, swaggers along in a pair of armani. If we are able to control our desire, in this case, to think, jeans is jeans, be it a 10$ cheap walmart version or a super-expensive designer version, that would be a start. Its not about the fact that we must buy cheap clothes. Buy what you can afford, within your means. Aspiring for something more, will start the ball rolling.

It is not easy. But every time we remind ourselves, and every attempt we make to overcome we win a small victory. This will hopefully inspire us to build on this success to reach the levels that Shankarcharya goads us to.

Formula for Happiness

noreply@blogger.com (ck2) — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 23:27:00 +0000

All of us are in constant search of happiness or let me put it more coherently, true happiness. From the day we are born till we die this becomes, singly, the biggest motive to our existence. I am happy right now, as i write this, that i finished my run and exercise for the day. I was happy in July 1982, because i gained admission into a decent college, inspite of less than good performance. I was happy a few years back, when i acquired my new digital SLR camera, and yesterday when i purchased a brand new battery for my Mac, and three years back, when i made the switch to the Mac, and before that when i went to a movie, ate outside, ate inside, ate, or didnt eat. I was happy on different occasions when i fulfilled the desire in my heart. And that also means i was sad or unhappy, when i couldnt or gave up on a desire.

I recently was reading of Swami Chinmayananda, from a story published by Amar Chitra Katha. In it, i read a clipping of his discourse, where he elucidates:

***Formula for Happiness***
Happiness =	Number of desires fulfilled
	Total number of desires craved

He explains further that in today's world, or to quote him, "in the western world", happiness is achieved by increasing the numerator, ie. the number of desires fulfilled. And in "the eastern world", happiness is achieved by decreasing the denominator, the number of desires. Think a bit, and like most mathematical equations, this too can be quickly understood. If you apply this formula to your life, you must enumerate these numbers, soon you will understand, that while today you might have achieved a lot of happiness, this cannot be said of you tomorrow or yesterday. And that is because these number are constantly changing.

To us human beings, the curse of desire, today symbolizes the pursuit of happiness. I began my life with a push cart while learning to walk, then i had a tricycle, a small bicycle, a motor cycle, a car, a bigger car, a better car, a more expensive car, a car more expensive and newer than my neighbour's car. I stop to take a breather now, having achieved all these, but remember, i no longer care for my tricycle, motorcycle or the first car. And my breath is soon lost, when my neighbour upstages me with a newer car. Now i have to add one more denominator and will attain happiness only when it is fulfilled. This process is endless and requires constant adjustments to my state of happiness, which now vacillates between one extreme to another, between joy and woe.

If we want to attain true happiness, the only way is to limit our desires, abate them, slowly at first, but steadily. Each desire limited or eliminated, takes you expeditiously closer to a more balanced mind, or state of happiness. This might seem in direct contrast to the current material world's definition of the pursuit of happiness. It has to be, because the material world today depends on us being dissatisfied, to grease the growth of economies. It is made to appear that today's generation is better than the previous, this century better than the last, this millennium better than before. We are in some ways, we have more information in our hands today, but this has not made us more intelligent. It should, we will then be able to understand formulas like these better, and apply it in our lives.

As for me, i am trying. Its not easy. The pressures of modern day living, it is difficult to do something like this. But it requires constant retrospection, and a lot of grit, to stand up against what would be considered normal. It at these moments, a power outside or within, helps.

Religion and India

noreply@blogger.com (ck2) — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 09:42:00 +0000

India has been the biggest laboratory int the world for invention and creation of religion. Four major religions originated in India, the smallest of which has about 6-12 million followers worldwide. While most nations are home to religions that originated outside, few are as tolerant, and fewer still offer refuge to followers of a foreign religion and their belief and practice. Our Dharma, always allowed us to listen, follow, preach and practice new ideas. There have been a few specific cases of intolerance, retribution, coercion and killing in the name of god and religion, throughout history, including here. But largely the collective Indian physique has tolerated and accepted newer ideas and religious beliefs. Even our Hindu scriptures themselves are replete with such amalgamation of ideas and concepts. And a closer observation will show that while it began its practice earlier than most, it has benefited and even appropriated practices from other religions that came along, most importantly Buddhism and Jainism.

I have attempted to provide a simple narrative for each form of religion that now find a home in India. All i have presented is some factoids, not a theological discussion of these religions. The main focus has been on numbers, and how India and the particular religion are associated, internally and some external comparison of strength in numbers. Numerical strength here, in my argument, is an indication of acceptance and assimilation, and also a factor to counter or favor as evidence for religious persecution.

India has the largest Hindu population in the world. Hindus form almost 80+% of the country's population. Hinduism is not the religion of the State (government of India). Unfortunately the concept of Hinduism is so tied to the history of India, and it has become indistinguishable from the birth of civilization in India. And much of these early facts about Hinduism, India and its ancient history has been colored by the, now considered bogus, theory of Aryan Invasion. Hinduism, like the indigenous Aryan or Dravidian culture, clearly was born in the sub-continent, and every new site and areas being discovered adds credibility to this fact. More excavations and deciphering the Indus Script will ultimately resolve this once and for all. With around 930 million followers, Hindus would become the fourth largest country in the world, immediately after India !

Jainism is probably one of the oldest religion in the world. This is not including Hinduism, which does not have specific timeline. Jainism also follows a very parallel path, although 900 BCE is often mentioned as the time when it originated. The period beginning around 600 BCE, is when Mahavira became its most influential teacher, and helped Jainism spread throughout most of India. Jainism, like Buddhism, influenced the thinking of Hinduism during its period of prominence. Today there are about 6 million Jains around the world, vast majority of them living in India. The official count of Jains in India is about 5 million. The identity of Jains are difficult to clearly ascertain, as they can be easily counted as Hindus in India and elsewhere, because of customs, particular sects and sub-sects and other idiosyncrasies.

Buddhism is another religion that originated in India. Followers of Buddha and his teachings, instituted from about 600 BCE, and has today about 250-500 million followers worldwide. Buddha was born as Prince Siddhartha in Lumbini, India, and attained enlightenment at Bodh Gaya, India. He lived the rest of his worldly life traveling through most parts of India. Buddhism too had a tremendous impact on the followers of Hinduism, not only because of very closely related ideologies etc, but also because of the compassionate form of the religion. However, today there are only 12 million people within India who are followers of the Buddhist religion. Buddhism was spread by Indian kings through the rest of Asia, to other parts of the globe, where they thrive in larger numbers.

Sikhism is one of youngest religion with a major following. There are about 26 million Sikhs around the world today, and over 22 million of them live in India. Founded by its first guru, fondly called Guru Nanak, in the 1500 CE, it has grown as the 5th largest religion in the world. Skihism is still relatively young compared to the timeline of other religious teachings and followers. Sikhs were mixed with the Hindus and considered another sect of Hinduism by many rulers of India and elsewhere until very recently. It has now been able to establish its true and unique identity.

Zoroastrianism, also known as Parsi in India, has it origins from Persia (today Iran). In 651 CE, with the influence of Islam, and the fall of last non-islamic empire in Persia, Zoroastrians had to migrate out or were slowly but steadily converted to Islam. Large numbers of Zoroastrians landed in the Indian sub-continent, near todays Gujarat and bordering Pakistan. There are only about 200 thousand followers of this faith around the world. The biggest majority live in India, numbering about 70 thousand. A very tight set of rules, that officially does not include conversions, and the practice of inter-community marriages to keep the faith, has resulted in their numbers slowly but steadily declining over the many years.

India is home to more Muslims than only Indonesia, as per 2001 census. As per the most recent available statistics (pending the 2011 census) there are an estimated 165 million Muslims, but that puts India behind only Indonesia and Pakistan. That is more than the population of Bangladesh, Egypt, Iran, Turkey etc. And more than the combined population of Bahrain, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, United Arab Emirates and Yemen, the middle-east arab nations. Islam arrived in India, soon after 600 CE, during the lifetime of Prophet Muhammad. The second oldest mosque in the world, exists in India, was built in 629 CE in Kerala, by Cheraman Perumal. Islam spread in India, even before the advent of the Mughals and other invaders who came from the north.

There are over 26 million Christians in India today. That is more than most countries in Europe, except the top 9 (including Russia). Christianity reached in India, probably with the arrival of St. Thomas in 52 CE. Although there is not much information of his evangelism, he is known to have seeded the faith in this country. Christianity's connection with India, runs even deeper, if more proof and facts can be uncovered around the final journey of Jesus, and his apparent life and final burial in Kashmir, India. These facts and incidence show that Christianity or the preachings of Jesus reached India, during his lifetime or immediately after.

It is important to mention the Bahá'í Faith, which also originated outside India, in present day Iran. There are only about 7 million followers of the faith, and almost a third of them, about 2.2 million live in India.

Not leave Judaism behind, India is home to about 15 thousand jews. This number may seem really inconsequential inside India, and also when compared to the world population of Jews numbering a little more than 13 million. However, the real significance is that Jews arrived in India almost 2500 years ago, around 562 BC (~~70 CE~~). There were given sanctuary by local kings and chieftains, and lived and made India home, till the birth of Israel in the 20th century CE, as a nation, when they began a reverse migration.

Krishna - The guru of all

noreply@blogger.com (ck2) — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 14:52:00 +0000

Gita Dhyanam, Verse 6


भीष्मद्रोणतटा जयद्रथजला गान्धारनीलोत्पला
शाल्यग्राहवती कृपेणवहनी कर्णेन वेलाकुला |
अश्वत्थामविकर्णघोरमकरा दुर्योधनावर्तिनी
सोत्तीर्णा खलु पाण्दवै रणनदी कैवर्तकः केशवः ||

bhiishmadronaatataa jayadrathajalaa gaandhaaraniilotpalaa
shaalyagraahavatii kripenavahanii karNena velAkulA |
ashvatthaamavikarnaghoramakaraa duryodhanAvartinI
sottIrNA khalu pANDavai rananadii kaivartakaH keshavaH ||

Bheeshma Drona the banks; Jayadratha the water; Gandhara a blue water lily;
Salya an alligator; Kripa the current; Karna a great swell of water;
Asvatthama and Vikarna frightful crocodiles; Duryodhana the whirlpool;
was crossed by Pandavas, that battle-river, because of their boatman Keshavah

With Krishna (keshava) at the helms of their boat, the Pandavas were able to cross the river filled with crocodiles, swirling whirlpools, fast current, the frightful water, its waves and swell, not be fooled by innocent looking flowers and banks. The river the great battle of Kurukshetra.

A nice poetic verse, but packed with a lot of meaning. The Gita Dhyanam, is a collection of verses that extol the virtue of Krishna, Keshava or Madhava as he is called within. These verses set an introduction to the Gita, creating the right mindset before one ventures in to the Bhagavad Gita. I learned this first when i attended the CHYK (Chinmaya Yuva Kendra) classes on sundays. While these verses do not lend itself to a sing-song chanting or a melodious poem, they pack in them deep meanings about Krishna, setting the stage for a Guru Shishya format.

This verse in particular, showcases the role of Krishna in single-handedly winning the Kurukshetra war for the pandavas. The philosophical impact of this verse, captures essence of Bhagavad Gita. 'Do your duty' is the strongest message communicated here. To explain in the tone of the verse, if you are in the boat, you could either loose your mind and leave control of your senses, because of the various dangers ahead, but it is best to leave your trust to the boatman to take to your end destination. If one were to look at every action, by attempting to deduce its, you may never start.

The Pandava brothers at different points of their journey expressed despair for different reasons, because people were related, taking the high moral ground or avoiding killing. When all along as a Kshatriya it was their dharma to fight injustice. Krishna had to repeatedly show them the right path and coax them to act. To each of us also, we at times may need a guru to help us navigate the waters of life. They come in many roles, mother, father, teacher, brother, sister, friend, etc., and at different points in life. We also need to understand that sometimes, or rather many times, faith helps. Faith helps close the gap between the action, its plan and the reaction.

Why Krishna Killed Karna?

noreply@blogger.com (ck2) — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 09:02:00 +0000

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

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

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

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

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

What is Om?

noreply@blogger.com (ck2) — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 03:12:00 +0000

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

BMI chart as used by Swami Chinmayananda.

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

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

Idol worship

noreply@blogger.com (ck2) — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 21:43:00 +0000

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

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

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

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

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

Hey Ram!

noreply@blogger.com (ck2) — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 04:53:00 +0000

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

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

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

Source: VHP's website

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

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

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

A million reasons to pray

noreply@blogger.com (ck2) — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 15:27:00 +0000

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

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

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

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

Rules. What rules? Just pray.

noreply@blogger.com (ck2) — Sun, 23 Nov 2008 11:59:00 +0000

Bhaja Govindam
Verse 1

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Krishna - Govardhanadhari

noreply@blogger.com (ck2) — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 11:21:00 +0000

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

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

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

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

Hindu fundamentalism

noreply@blogger.com (ck2) — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 15:51:00 +0000

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

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

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

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

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

Saying thanks.

noreply@blogger.com (ck2) — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 20:22:00 +0000

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Soul

noreply@blogger.com (ck2) — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 12:12:00 +0000

Bhagavad Gita, Chapter 2, Verse 23

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A Theism

noreply@blogger.com (ck2) — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 11:39:00 +0000

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

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

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

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

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

Mine vs Yours

noreply@blogger.com (ck2) — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 21:27:00 +0000

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

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

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

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

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

Krishna & Karna

noreply@blogger.com (ck2) — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 14:55:00 +0000

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

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

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

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

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

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

Krishna

noreply@blogger.com (ck2) — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 14:43:00 +0000

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Only one God

noreply@blogger.com (ck2) — Fri, 28 Dec 2007 08:42:00 +0000

There is only one god and his name is Krishna.

This might border on conceit or narcissism, given that people from other religions, or even other Hindus may find this very offending. But this is my opinion and this is my blog. And this is not an attempt to offend others, their gods or other gods. My point is simple, all religions speak the same message, that, ‘there is only one god’.

Some of them even name him or her in their scriptures. While there are a lot of references to this in the Hindu scriptures too, they don’t always point to the same name or icon. Krishna, has always declared himself as god, also acknowledges the presence of others in the Hindu pantheon. In this blog, i am not going to into details about why Krishna, but i hope to blog about that too. The character itself is of special meaning to me, and hence the choice becomes easier to make.

We call him or her by many names. Even Hinduism and related offshoots, allows the acceptance of pretty much anything and everything as god or an icon for god, specifies that these are mere substitutes for the bigger and all containing ‘Brahman’. Newer religions have attempted to reduce this level of confusion by mandating that there be only one god. But even they have failed to enforce these strictures.

People find it difficult to associate the philosophy of religion and the meaning of scriptures to their daily lives. To many, if not all, scriptures and philosophy are of profound meaning, to be contemplated about, but when it comes to practice, any and all straws that will help keep them afloat, can and will be treated as god.

While i am not very different, i have been able to exercise some prudence. I try to clutch at straws, but i call them all the same, Krishna. I look up on at all the same, but then what i see is only one image, and that of Krishna. This is not something romantic or idealistic, but more an issue of practicality. It is easier to call out to one person, than to reach out to the rain, sun, earth, wind, money and love gods.

Who is God ? Who are you ?

noreply@blogger.com (ck2) — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 14:46:00 +0000

It appears easy to answer on the face of it. Who is God? We can conjure up images, names, deeds, boons and punishments too, to describe a God we know. Each one of us, have different images or idea of who this person or being is. Or do we ?

Let me try a different take here. Who are you ? I would attempt to answer this by "i am CK".

Are you the name ? Because when you introduce yourself, you say "my name is CK", implying your name is CK, you are not ? While sometime i do pronounce "I am CK". But even as you say this you realize the power of 'ego' that is conveyed through that pronouncement. Again indicating that there is more to it, than just pure truth. Or simply put, that might be false.

Are you the face ? Are you the hands, the body or the legs ? Are you the heart or the mind ? Each of these part of the body is considered yours. That means, these are things you possess but they dont make you. It is my face, my legs, my hand, my heart and my mind, but not me.

Could you, then be the thoughts? The dreams, the emotions, the pain, the love that you have. Because to many people it is the thoughts and words stated that defines them. Here again, these are your thoughts. And the same conclusions can be drawn, as they are yours, but not you. They are mine, but do not define me.

Who is this 'you' or 'i' ? If you try to determine that i am all of these things indicated earlier, all of them put together. Then what happens after you or i die. Well when you die, or i die. We still tend to remain. But then its mostly an imagination in someone's mind. Whereas the i that was used associate myself with, is a dead body that needs to be cremated or buried. Like old clothes, we leave the body we used behind.

So, finally then. Who am i ? Who are you ? Who is God?

Karma - the act of god

noreply@blogger.com (ck2) — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 02:53:00 +0000

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

These two lines define my entire belief in religion. A short quick meaning is that 'do your duty, and fret not about the rewards'. There is more to it, but thats not what this short blog is about. Its more about that one word 'Karma'.

I was at a Health Summit and Conference recently in New Delhi, where i had the honor of seeing, listening and finally touching the Dalai Lama. His visit was not disclosed before (because of security reasons), and so it was a special surprise to an otherwise dull and boring work session. He spoke a bit about care, compassion and things related to the medical field, and then opened up the floor for questions.

The first question came from a person, who wanted to know, 'in this fast paced life, we dont have time to pray and think about god everytime'. He wanted the Dalai Lama to 'help us quickly remember god everyday, some mantra or special prayer that we could quickly offer everyday'. I was thinking 'hmm, interesting question, but then what could someone say to this kind of question'. While everything he says is true, what he is asking for is impossible. The very fact that someone asks such a question means lack of faith and time. Was he asking for the secret mantra that Dalai Lama had to reach god.

Then the Dalai Lama spoke (i am paraphrasing here, so please dont quote this literally) 'you dont have to pray to god everyday. Karma Yoga - that is the best way to reach god. do your best to help others. reach and remember god, by your actions'. I was flabbergasted, because that statement he made, perfectly mirrored my belief in my religion.

The Hindu Dharma has many means or paths (yoga) to reach god, Jnana, Bhakti and Karma yoga. Jnana yoga takes you to the ultimate truth, using the path of knowledge. Bhakti yoga is the path of devotion. Karma yoga is the path, through your actions. In the Bhagavad Gita, these paths are clearly defined. And while i have given very simplistic definitions and outlook to each of these paths, there is more to it than just the meaning of the words jnana (knowledge), bhakti (devotion) and karma (duty/action). But to me, us simplistic mortal, who are looking for the easy way out, the karma yoga is the really the easy way out. But action towards whom ?

To others, your fellow human beings, your family, friends, neighbours, service providers, and last but not least to yourself. I believe that we all live and breath because of the 'soul' or 'atma' in our body. We are born many times, as many living things, because we need to uplift this atma, so that it can reach its ultimate goal, the 'paramatma'. How do you get there ? Well, one lifetime at a time. Each lifetime, we better ourselves by doing better and better things, more help to people, more service to society, selfless service to human and other living things. That is our karma, and we will benefit from all the good karma in this lifetime, and have a better life the next. And so slowly, one lifetime at a life, we move along the path to the paramatma.

Temple rituals

noreply@blogger.com (ck2) — Sat, 20 Oct 2007 14:09:00 +0000

I visit temples often, and when i do, i have a ritual to perform. No one tells me to do this, and nor am i the kind of person who will do things because someone tells me to. Well, i do, it depends on the person tho. Most of my rituals inside the temple is based on what my grandmother told me. And i have been at it, like clockwork, since the days i can remember.

But then increasingly i have been seeing myself do these things and wonder, why, what. And as i stand there inside the temple, i start thinking, is this all real. Who is this being, that i am trying to reach out to? Does it matter if have gone around the idol three times? Whether it achieves any significance in the eyes of others, it sure sets me at peace. I am not then thinking about any non-adherence for the rest of the day. It has a way of working in your inner head. The voice from in there, never really shuts up.

So in a sense i do, what i do, for my own peace. Not because it is a secret ritual to be peformed a million times to open the sacred doors of heaven. Palazhi (milky ocean) and its doors are my visions of heaven, based on the multitude of stories narrated by my ammooma (grandma). So, then is it ok, for others to do their rituals to appease their inner voice. I guess it must be so. What's good for me, must be good for others too.

But, what happens when that ritual and effects of those, cause pain, distress or suffering to others. Or what if it results in wastage of money or other resources in the name of appeasing the lord. I think i both cases, i am against and will not support or participate as best as i can. It is saddening to see milk poured over an idol to cleanse it, when it could be used to feed a few poor. I wonder if that would have appeased the lord more ?

So while, rituals are necessary part of the process of religion and god etc. But i think it is important for us to realize why we are doing these. Are they meant to satisfy your inner voice ? In which case, can it not be toned down, so that it doesnt hurt people or other living beings, or even waste money and other precious resources.

Why this Blog?

noreply@blogger.com (ck2) — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 06:18:00 +0000

For sometime, actually for quite sometime, i have been arguing with myself about God, religion and whole purpose of life etc. I oscillate from an atheist to a god loving and fearing being. I have no qualms though, when i argue against the concept of god, while also folding my hands in prayer. It may reek of double standards, but that hardly makes me unique in this world.

I believe in a supreme being. I believe his name is Krishna, for any other name simply doesnt cut it for me. I believe in him, when i see sun rise with a glory of colours, when i see hear a bird sing a tune, when i see the ocean and its powerful waves, when i see the mountains climbing up to touch the sky, when i see the distant star twinkle in the night, or when during a rare night i can see the milkyway (akash ganga), or even when i think how i am alive today, but just a bones and flesh when a small piece of him goes away from me. I am what i am, because of the life in me, and that according to me is the God i worship, because soon after i am dead, i am referred to as a 'body' that needs to be cremated or buried. But not a person who needs to be fed, bathed, clothed or cared for.

Then again, when i think of God as a person who came and stated things, gave us rules in the form of scriptures, created the wonderful heaven we can gain entry into, or the hell we will burn if we dont obey or pray, i can only see him as a creation of men. Men who felt that they must create some form or being that can be looked up to, by mere mortals, for divine direction. And then after creating the God they wanted, they also went about creating the rules. These rules then evolved (much to the displeasure of the proponents of 'creation' theory) to take new forms and sub-clauses because of new thinking and living. God soon became just a tool, to manage human beings. Lessons of management, teaches us that, when you manage a large group of people, it necessary to divide and organize them, and so we then got ourselves different gods to please each smaller group.

This blog is my way of trying to prove or disprove to myself, whether god exists, god created man, man created god, god gave us scriptures, or did the scriptures define a god. More importantly it is also my theory of God, religion and scriptures, how i approach these and how i use these for my everyday life. I believe in the concept of hinduism, which gives me the utmost freedom in choosing my god and my scripture, in choosing my path to attain moksha. While other religion may offer the same salvation, but my understanding, very limited as it is, indicates that i need to subscribe to stricter path.

I hope to write out my thoughts and explanation to things i see in this universe, when i find a link to my God, or when i feel his hand or touch. And also use this to argue against myself and other views which i dont agree with, in terms of religion, scriptures and god itself. This is a search for truth, and so help me god.