We Start from Where We Stand !

The meaning of the word Ishta Devatha Nishta is - 

Ishta - one's own liking; Devatha -- Godhead
Nishta -- deeply involved practice.

So this 'deeply involved devotion towards one's Choice of Godhead' is never allowed to become, in any way, fanaticism. Because, even from the Vedic times, the Universal Idea has been firmly implanted in the Hindu's mind.

'There is but one Truth; Sages have been calling it by different names'

'The water falls from the Sky and flows through many ways to the self-same Sea; likewise the devotions towards many Gods ultimately reach the self-same Kesava'

The same thought is given in a sloka of Siva Mahimna stotra.

So the General and Universal aspect of Hinduism always worked in tandem with the individual worships of Chosen Gods. This two layered structure was organic rather than artificial. It was not an outwardly agreed upon arrangement but something which was evolved through the internal exercise of coupling the vast spiritual freedom with inevitable human limitations. The human nature was at no time ignored. The transcendence of abstractions was at no time lost sight of. The whole field of Religion was a veritable education for the Hindus.

Any human being can start anywhere and go by his own path unhampered by any sort of sojourners' pressure.

You unto your path
Me unto mine
And for us there is
Always the Divine.

***

Complete and Creative !

The Devotee's passion is to see his Chosen God as the Ultimate and God Almighty of the universe. The Jnani's passion is to merge in the Ultimate. Both ways are seeing the same thing from different perspectives, provided, you don't get sabotaged by fanaticism or snobbery of intellectualism.

If by becoming narrow in your chosen devotion, you become more spiritual, then your narrowness is blessed. If by becoming more universal and more abstract in your inner most mind, you go nearer to the Ultimate Soul, then your universal and abstract outlook is blessed. What matters is, are you going towards the Centre?

If the circumference takes you towards the centre, then it serves its central Soul. If the radii take you away from the Centre, then the radius is wretched. But Hinduism is a Beautiful Circle. The radii never take you away. And the circumference never makes you dry.

Did I say a beautiful circle? Yes, and more than that, an enchanting spiral and an engulfing spherical. An expert artist is fond of free variations of his tunes. Never is he content in striking a mono chord. The God of the Hindus is highly aesthetic.

Art seems to be Its passion. It rejoices in the sight of the ardent soul. It comes unseen as the abstract vastness.
It hides Itself in the heart as the possessing Love.
Treading the solo path, the soul takes to wings every now and then. To arrest it in any single walk may become an injustice to the Infinite. To feign a vastness where you have to feel pangs of Love may be an act of deserting the Centre.
Who knows which soul is in what delicate equilibrium of spiritual growth?

It is this mystical humility, the real concern imbued with spiritual expectation, that is at the heart of all the systems and paths of Hinduism.

What are The Texts ?

It is great and grand enough to be universal and all inclusive, just like the Sky and the Sea. Hinduism is of course a beautiful circle. But are there any books of reference, in times of preparatory years and the beginning steps of one's spirituality. Any definite anchor to stay floating and not to drift aimlessly.

Even birds which fly inter-continentally, do carry some chart of instincts in their flights. The Soul after all, does have its beginning in self-realization, in the mortal coil. Books are indispensable in any religion, even in those religions which have dispensed with gods.

Hinduism prescribes three prime most important books. It has garnered all its spiritual values in there, in those three books. Upanishads, Brahma Sutras Bhagavath Gita.

Upanishads proper are called the Vedantha, the culminations and conclusions of the Vedic inquiries. Vedanthas are also called the Sruthis, the Revelations heard. These three books are called Prasthana Thraya. Three Books based on the primacy of three facets of spiritual quest.

What are those? Sruthi, Yukthi, Anubhava

Revelation, Reasoning, Experiencing.

The Book that is based on the Revelation is Vedanthas or Upanishads. The Book that is based on Reasoning is Brahma Sutras. The Book that is based on Experiencing is Bhagavath Gita.

Man comes to know of God only when He informs of His presence through some ways. He is not of the category of concrete things. He is definitely abstract. He is the abstraction of abstractions. So He is known more clearly through Words. For only words can connote more than concrete the abstractions. Hence the Book of Revelations.
Then comes the Book of Reasoned out arguments on the Upanishadic concepts. Human Reason is given full scope to analyze and understand the Heard Book of The Divine.
Textual exegesis and hermeneutics form very important tools along with the philosophical understanding of the Grammar.
Only then ensues the study of Brahma Sutras or Vedantha Mimamsa. Then comes the Book of Experiencing, viz., Bhagavath Gita. The whole Gita pours out of the involved experiencing of Sri Krishna, the greatest Vedanthic teacher ever born.

*** 

Three and Four Again !

To speak of abstractions is good. But life happens to run on details. That too daily, domestic concerns and cares.
We are impelled to actions more out of necessity than out of intellectual commitment. Human being is an acting being as much as a willing being, as much as a knowing being. To know, to will and to act form the three facets of the self-same soul.

Jnathruthvam - the faculty of knowing; karthruthvam -- the faculty of acting; bhogthruthvam -- the faculty of enjoying
describe the three facets of the Soul. These three facets form the basic psychology of any individual. So any spiritual practice must incorporate in itself different strands of these triads. Hinduism has devised four such modus operandi -- viz., the four Yogas -- the Jnana Yoga, the Karma Yoga, the Bhakthi Yoga and the Raja Yoga or the psychological Yoga proper.

***

That Which Sustains is Dharma !

All the world religions talk about something in Heaven, which man must reach. Religion is other-worldly, according to them.
They compensate that aspect of their religions by doing social service, as the main practice of their faith. Of course they combine it with propaganda. But the main idea is that Divinity is something from above into man or from outside into man's life. So religion as an institution of training men to mourn and wish for a super reality is inherent in world religions.

But Hinduism never talks of religion as such. It always speaks of Dharma. Dharma is the reality as it is in principles.
From atom to cosmos Dharma runs like a golden thread.
The sustained, becomes the sustainer, through out nature.
It is best for man to find out as early as possible his place in this universe. Fulfill your place in nature and that in turn will fulfill your nature as a man. According to Dharma, you have the final beatitude always in you, carrying it through all stages of the growth. The troubles start when you act in neglect of your value in Dharma.

Divinity is not somewhere. It is, has been, and will be shining in your heart. In the heart of every being, He resides and moves the world. 

***

Red Green and Amber !

Divine Revelation Debating Reason Devotional experience
These are the triple lights that form the basic canons of Hinduism. Vedas or Shruthi is the light of Divine Revelation.
Brahma Sutras is the light of debating Reason. Srimad Bhagavad Gita is the light of Devotional Experience. All the three lights bring to vision the same reality.

What Reason understands of the Revelation, Experience confirms. Shruthi, Yukthi, Anubhava are the words used by the great Adisankara for Revelation, Reason and Experience.
But what is the basic proof of Religion according to Hinduism? Is it reading, debating, being emotional, building an empire of the faith? Not anyone of these. They mean nothing, if the basic proof is not there. The basic proof is not believing something. It is 'Seeing God'.

To see God is the basic proof of Religion. It is the Vision, which the words explicate. Beholding is the base, believing may be only a prop on the way. The Vision is not concrete. It is the Transcendental Vision.

Words are not mundane but they descend to the earth carrying the pure warmth of Divinity, only to form the ascend back along with men.

Some years back I wrote dealing with what is devotion this observation -- Unless and until one understands that Bhakthi is something which encompasses man's reason totally, it should be understood that his dawn is yet to come.

Hinduism is the project of man, which started when he discovered that there is really, God.

***

Master for the Young !

Books have been written aplenty in any school of thought in Hinduism. Abstract treatises abound on any strand of thinking. Even on Sri Vaishnava Sampradaya, the books I have may fill up a library. But all the books, all the treatises, on all the schools have their bearing, have their anchor in Vedantha. Even the Agamas which centre their ideology on temple worship and theology have their locus in Vedantha.

Knowing Vedantha is knowing its methodology. Knowing Vedantha is explicating the world of Upanishads into consistent study of the Ultimate Truth. The commentaries of the old, tutor this methodology and inculcate the Vedanthic thinking. But we have a blessing in Swami Vivekananda. He is the great Master of Modern Hinduism. His complete works provide a cogent text book of Hinduism and lends an efficient work table to improve oneself upon. For the young generations and coming ages there is no other workable hypothesis better than reading the Great Sage.

Ever and the River !

We have been talking of Sruthi and Smrithi. Canons of the Universal Principles and Books that deal with the customs, mores and habits of the people. That which deals with the eternal principles are the Vedantas or Upanishads or the philosophical Vedas. They tell us about Atman, Jeeva, Paramatman and the eternal life beyond. Why is Jeeva born in this world and what is his goal and how to reach it?

And basically who is Jeeva really? What is his real nature?
Your real nature determines what you must attain and in what way you must do it? If your real nature is something temporal. i.e., you exist by your very nature for sometime and simply go out of existence with nothing surviving, then you cannot think of eternal life and so on. When you yourself is just temporal, there is no point in breaking your head about that nature. But if your real nature is not temporal but eternal, then you must realise that nature and strive to attain the eternal life, which is your right by the very fact of your real nature. If you are really the eternal soul then what is that goal which you must reach?

What is the nature of that Almighty and what relationship connects you two? And what is that Way which you must choose? What causes the delay? and what are the impediments on the way? All these are explained in detail in Vedanta. These questions never change in time. They are the eternal spiritual principles of man's life.

But the social questions, viz., the social divisions, the problems of man and woman, the problems of the ruled and the ruler, the questions of family, the relationships of social living, all these are social problems which change with the time and they have to be updated based on the social realities and necessities by the societies concerned. The Books of Memory which deal with such things are the Smrithis, which are changeable in time and must be changed by the social heads retaining the best of the past and adapting to the present.

*** 

Deep Within and Beyond !

The canons of Hinduism categorize between the changing and the unchanging aspects of the religious life. Srutis cater to the eternal questions. Smritis deal with the changing problems of the society and human beings. This is quite comparable to the dual aspects of the God Hinduism preaches. God according to Hinduism is both immanent and transcendent in nature. He is even inside an atom. He transcends even the widest stretch of the Cosmos.

aNOr aNeeyAn mahatO mahIyAn. Even in the micro space He resides in total Fullness. Again in the macro space He encompasses the entire details. Perhaps this Vision of God has inspired the very structure of Hinduism.

Hinduism is particular in its Universality and universal in its Particularity. Just because He is immanent in all things, we cannot say the world is spiritual. And just because He is Transcendent to the world, the World in no way becomes secular.

Actually God is the Totality, - the spiritual, the mundane, the cognizing souls, the created objects - everything forms part of the Totality, which is God. In what way all these things share in the Totality makes the inter-related Whole share with the indwelling parts in more than many ways. We have to find out our place in this Totality. Or rather we have to yield ourselves so that the Totality may find its domain inside us.

*** 

Twicely Good !

The God of Hinduism is both transcendent and immanent.
The canons of Hinduism talk about the changing and the unchanging aspects of the human life. The Religion of Hinduism is both universal in philosophy and private in practice. The people of Hinduism are austere in celebrating and celebrating in austerities. They call this world as the Vibhuti of God. Vibhuti means manifested splendour.

So to shine in this world devoid of God is to court deprivation and poverty of Spirituality. And to shun this world as something despicable is to dishonour His splendour. And to claim this world as one's own is to commit robbery. And to think of oneself as the property of the ego, forgetting the true owner viz., God is to commit ontological theft. But to enjoy this world as belonging to the God and to realise oneself as the property of Him are sure ways of securing Prosperity and Spiritual Felicity.

Abhyudaya, i.e., Prosperity is to see this world as belonging to the God.

Nisreyasa, i.e., Spiritual Felicity is to see oneself as His possession.

*** 

Four Track Way of the Soul

In Hinduism any living being is called Jiva. Ji is to live. Any being that lives is Jiva. Jiva has three aspects in existence.

First is - Jiva is a knowing subject. It is capable of knowing that which is. It is capable of knowing itself. That is, Jiva has Knowingness or Jnathruthva. Jiva is an acting agent. It is capable of action. It is capable of adopting means towards ends. Jiva has Actingness or Karthruthva. Jiva is also an enjoyer. It is capable of enjoying the pleasures and it covets the pleasures. Jiva has Enjoyingness or Bhogthruthva.

Jiva is a Knower; an Acting Agent; an Enjoyer. To act and to enjoy are nothing but more special forms of the Knowingness of Jiva. So to liberate Jiva is to make it free to express itself fully by way of knowing, acting and enjoying. Hence Hinduism designs the paths toward liberation in such a way that all the three faculties are put to use towards freedom.

Four such paths have been shown to the soul, viz., the Path of Knowledge, the Path of Action, the Path of Yoga, the Path of Love. They are called Jnana Yoga, Karma Yoga, Raja Yoga and Bhakthi Yoga respectively. All the four elements are in each and every one of the four, but with varying accents.
This Four Way Road is the National Highway of Hindu Religious practice.

*** 

I Know, I Do, I Will !

The four fold paths of Yoga, viz., Jnana Yoga, Karma Yoga, Raja Yoga and Bhakthi Yoga have their anchor steeply laid in one important element of the nature of the Soul, which is the possession of the three faculties. The faculties are Knowledge, Action and Enjoyment. But what is the nature of the Soul as such? Or is there anything as Soul in human living, not to speak of general life as it is.

Hinduism points out how in our own experience we have assumed and accepted the presence of the Soul before we venture to talk anything me or mine. The very human experience of its own beingness becomes impossible if we dare to doubt the primemost premise of the reality of the Soul. Of course here and hereafter we would like to mean by the word 'Soul', not its original Greek concept but what Hinduism means by the word 'Atman'. Atman or Soul has as its innermost essential characteristic, 'Chaitanya'. Chaitanya is the fact of being the 'Chit'.- 'Conscious Core'.

Consciousness is the tool we use in Knowing. Applied Consciousness is Knowledge. Potential Knowledge or the potentiality to know is the Consciousness. So, according to Hinduism, Jiva, the living being, irrespective of its being a human or any other living being, is intrinsically Atman or Chit. Any living being is a conscious being in essence. How far any living being manifests its essence of being conscious, in actuality, makes all the difference between a human being and other living beings. Of course the problem of the sophistication of the Sarira or the Body scales down the spectrum of Life on Earth.

The main idea is - Jiva is not only something which lives but also quite as essentially, if not more, a being which is conscious, and also, a being which enjoys. The degree may differ with the species but the nature of the kind is universal to the Jivas.

*** 

Are you the rwenty-fifth ?

Jiva, the word for the living is synonymous with Chit, the word for being conscious. The whole world can be classified into the living and the non-living. Hinduism differentiates between the conscious and the non-conscious, the Chit and the Achit. Only the God and the Soul come under the classification of the Chit. The being of Chit is Chetana. God is Parama Chetana.

In Hinduism the whole world has been classified into 24 Tathvas. The natural elements 5 - Earth, Water, Fire, Wind, Space The sensory organs 5 - Eye, Ear, Tongue, Nose, Skin
The sensations 5 - Sight, Sound, Taste, Smell, Touch
Organs of action 5 - Hands, Feet, Speech, Anus, Sexual organs

Organs of mind 4 - Mental Stuff, Mind, Intellect, Ego

So the world that comes to knowledge is comprised in these 24 principles, viz., the natural elements, the sensory organs, the sensations, the organs of action and the organs of mind.
The Knower, the Chit or the Atman is the 25th principle that comes after enumerating all the principles of the Known.
So Atman itself is sometimes referred to as the Twentyfifth Principle in the Sastras of Hinduism.

*** 

Brevity, Sankhya and Vedanta

Sankya philosophy spanned the whole world of things and knowledge about those simply in 24 principles. And nearly all the schools of Hinduism take the Sankyan clarification of the known world as the base of their enquiry. In 24 principles you just grasp the whole universe.

Who is 'the one who grasps'? That is the knower? Yea really it is the soul or Jivatman. And he stands as the 25th principle. And he does stand apart different in kind. The previous 24 principles are all belonging to one classification - viz., 'Objects Known'. Whereas the 25th, i e., the knower, Jivatman, is not an object known. He is the knower who knows all things and objects.

And you can just think further about an encompassing whole which comprises all these, - known objects and the knowing soul, who are different in kind, but go to make our picture of the world. But what do you think, the nature of that encompassing whole? Will it be different in kind from these two, objects and the knower soul? Surely is it not? That Whole cannot be of the same kind as the objects known or the knower, Jivatman. But the nature of the Whole must be such that, the natures of the member-categories, viz., the objects and the soul are included within. That Whole cannot be totally 'Object' and also that Whole must house the object also inside itself. If that Whole cannot be just object, then the Whole must be more akin to the nature of the knower soul. But if it is just another soul, how can it include within itself different kinds like objects, which are known and Jivatman which actually knows the objects? So it becomes obvious that that Whole should be of a nature, which transcends the natures of member-categories like objects and knower, but which includes all the while these member-categories.

Hence the Whole is named as Supreme Soul, Param Atma. The whole includes objects but also transcends the nature of objects. Hence it is called Para Vastu - Param Porul or Supreme Substance. And Vedanta, which is the methodology which inquires into the real import of the Revelations, for instance, Vedas, likes very much the brevity in the number of basic principles involved and to be studied. Some sects give a very detailed listing of basic principles, so that pinning down all shades and variations as separate principles. But Vedanta lays down as one of its basic dictums - Lagava or brevity is essential. The principles must be reduced to most essentials and just multiplication of principles will not in any way enhance one's enquiry and also will not help in understanding.

***

Workbook 1

Born in a great temple town in a family having dynamic and meaningful proportions of tradition and modernity I was saved from so many hurdles that may face one otherwise. For that I must thank my father and mother. And also the tradition of Sri Ramanuja provides one a climate of knowledge-as-a-value. Of course you must care to make use of that. If you do, then, the webbing atmosphere acts positive to that or at least does nothing to stifle your enthusiasm towards acquiring knowledge. My life should have passed for, set in the regular ways of domestic indulgence, job-finding and getting settled in life. But the fatal moments do happen in some people's life. Only thing is I do not regret that moment in my life. My balance sheet ticks that moment as positive, of course after balancing various aspects. A chance reading of some reader in Tamil printed in 1942 or so, dusting in the family rafts of a Sunday afternoon deposited a saying of Sri Ramakrishna, assuring one of God vision if only that person craves and cries for three days. Whatever that saying meant, it was imprinting on the mind of a school student the idea of God as possible reality. I realised that that saying got stuck in my mind only when an occasion happened, when I had to stress the possibility of God-realisation to another boy in our hot discussions across the streets of a December night. Trying to convince him, I was caught. Or I was set in the path of freedom you may say.

Slowly I started rummaging my father's collection of books, half of them lined on a raft in the hall and the rest in another room or godown of various things. In fact I was thinking at that time that how M K T Bhagavthar had written something in English, seeing a photo in an old edition of The Study of Religion by Swami Vivekananda, Udbodhan Office, one of my father's acquisitions. I corrected myself only after some time. And when that book was brought to common use between myself and another friend of mine, an old lady seeing that photo by chance exclaimed 'Oh! is it M K T Bhagavathar!'. Anger rushed at the first instant only to subside at the next, for, was I not her senior in that impression?

Browsing through my father's collections was followed by purchasing of small booklets and low-priced books of Sri Ramakrishna and Swami Vivekananda. The money was out of savings of chance windfalls that may happen to a school student. May be some happy moments of the mother, or some sudden visits by grandmas and aunts, or some sudden offers of gifts by uncles - something was happening making it possible to acquire books more and more on one's own. The temple shops were a blessing. And I was becoming slowly a reputed customer to be treated with deference. It was a nice feeling to have in that age of trousers. A book-reading boy is not someone to be trifled with. So when the books were growing in number, the old corner of my school bags and things were not enough space for a blossoming scholar. So I had to clean the godown room and make space for my precious library, growing day by day. Local book-shops in the temple premises were not enough. Also having a like-minded friend is great company, if you decide to walk all the way to distant places for big book-shops. From booklets to thin booklings to big books, which we were calling as 'kills', the intellectual life slowly stretched in more extense. Book-reading is a bad habit, bad in the sense it makes you venture tougher and bigger books and sometimes abstract genres. Is it so with every reader, I do not know but it was exactly so with one reader. Reading consumed that reader, one can say. But no regrets at all. When chance comparing with childhood friends show you in bad lights as one who does not know how to live, so what, even if the life is deemed as waste? Taking to the next big book or subject in the line makes you forget all such self-demo reports and you are high in your own world. You can compare it with getting drugged, so what, you get amazing understanding of things and subjects. But what about life? We will leave that and you can write me as a failure on that account. No bother.

And you do not stay content with one sort of books, if you fall into reading. But one thing I must tell you. In reading I had a special talent of going deep into the moods and sentiments of an author, whoever he or she may be. I realised this tangibly only later and also I heard it pointed out by one friend, who took a great liking to hear me reading his pet authors. How I got this and why are things beyond me but such a talent makes one's reading time creative. This is curious. Actually reading is half passive always but for me the experience was different. Not only the authors but also concepts were becoming very transparent in my reading forages. So If I took one book and phased my back in a convenient corner I could escape the reality around and along with that escape the relevant cares and responsibilities too. Such an addiction makes you hate rash changes in life pattern. So naturally you limp back in the race of life or life passes you by inevitably. But the life sounded various warnings at various times through events and persons to a boy who was becoming more and more reckless lost in the world of ideas. I do not want to justify my choices or the effects. I am just awake to my reality and more so I do not feel any persistent sorrow or remorse.

Reading has not been indiscriminate too with me. That is any book just like that didn't hop up into my reading time. The selection, was it conscious or partly so, I do not know. I have been thinking that I always decided on what books but it is only a part of the story. Some books jumped in by chance. I remember very well the case of Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged. I have heard about her even very early in my eighth standard in High School. But only when I was about to finish my college years I picked that book from my friend's table just as a curiosity, with both the title and the author striking new to me. Only when giving a look-over to the book back and front I vaguely remembered the author mentioned many years ago along with her book The Virtue of Selfishness. But reading Atlas Shrugged straight through for one full week completely changed me from a theist to an atheist and clarified and confirmed my stand on reason.

And also I must say, books have been acting like ghosts on me. When they possessed me it was really radical. That was the case with Ramakrishna Vivekananda literature which started in my fourteenth year. You begin to see, perceive, opine and feel as if you are a character coming in the genre of books that is holding you at that time. Even you begin to feel that you are privy to even some unwritten aspects of the persons you are holding in hero-worship at the time. It is like, 'what if.. it is not written over there?... I know it... I feel it...' it is like that. Then your being assumes a mystic meaning. Some half-legible and half-hidden transcendent purpose activates you from behind.

But reading is only one of the activities of life, that too a mental activity. Why should that take such a place in my life is mysterious to myself. May be astrology can explain such mysteries rather than rational analysis. But astrology appealed to me very late in time. Reason will always be at loggerheads with such unusual methods. But trying to understand the mystery of living is something different; risky but I think it defies any formulas. Really as per my deep interest in Ayn Rand and the thought I had that I had reached the final in her philosophy, I must conclude that I have degraded from being rational. But again this is another bad habit in me, that I take to anything which makes me understand my life, usual or unusual ways. Sometimes I think that I am a confused personality. But I am quite happy with the way I operate even though I do not measure up to fixed standards.

One thing alone I find it difficult, being neither to my liking nor in my element. That is, believing, taking something on faith. My way of worshiping the Divine has always been trying to understand. Of course I believe in cooperating with the methodology but it is always provisional. Any final dictum which precludes my understanding loses me from its subscription. Has no faith any efficacy in transcendental efforts of understanding? When accosted like that I may not be able to counteract but somehow I am not able to feel at home with such a demand as a final writing-off. I am not able to think of the Divine as resenting my efforts to understand it, especially when it is being stressed repeatedly in the transcendent literatures that the Divine is essentially Gnosis. If it is full and full Knowledge in form, how else to approach it relevantly rather than by knowing. Alright, let us say we dispense with any effort of understanding as a way and rather take to faith. After that when we are participating in the Divine level, what will we do if we have discarded understanding, knowing once for all. Even at that level to understand the greatness of the Divine and its inexhaustible goodness, should we not have unhampered function of knowledge? Do not the scriptures various say that our knowledge is hampered in this world but it becomes unlimited in the transcendent levels.? But I am able to understand the place of faith as part of provisional preparations and only as that.

But instead of breaking one's head like this it was so easy and full of relief for me when I became deeply involved in Ayn Rand's Objectivism. All these questions, I was able to shove off as meanderings of the mystics and not meriting any serious concern except as something detrimental to human living. But getting into Ayn Rand's novels and ideas and phasing ourselves with some heroic character consciously or unawares fixed a viewpoint binocular vision on our eyes on others and the outside world and also our own spontaneous actions and thoughts. A detective eye of well proven standards was always wide open in the mind. But slowly I was changing from that, at first imperceptibly and later more definitely. The world which became thin and constricted was again getting colours and curves. What was failing on the basis of reason was entering back by way of culture. To be a strict Ayn Rand enthusiast, who was already a sober person, made me very miserly on my emotions and highly judgmental on others around, especially one's near and dear kins. So as a result I was becoming more and more unpopular in my own domestic fronts. Of course I was more than compensated by being well-armed By AR's clarifications on reason and individuality and the social complexes structured around altruism, which otherwise was not available anywhere down the time or across the globe.

'oyyum' a rare Tamil word

We shall take the word 'oyyum' in Tamil.

Here in this word again we see the connotations varying widely and even to opposites.

'oyyum' may mean 'steer'. Steering small boats or catamarans out into the seas. NaRRiNai 74 talks of such a situation where it uses this word in the sense of steering. - barathavar oyyum siRu vee jnAzhal perung kadal.

Here it is 'oyyum siRu vee jnAzhal'.

'oyyum' can be used in the sense of 'grabbing' also. This is something interesting in the usages of words. It is a feature not rare in the languages in general. That too in languages coming down in time for long and rich in literary wealth, these features should be expected.

Again NaRRiNai 100 uses the word 'oyyum' in the sense of grabbing. - munai Urp pal A nedu nirai villin oyyum.

The meaning range includes not only grabbing but also 'giving'. See the scene where the bird nArai gives its female of the arched beak, the fishes of the sea! - kodu vaayp pEdaikku mudamuthir nArai kadal meen oyyum. (NaRRiNai 263)

The range is not exhausted. The meanings 'pulling' and 'chasing away' and 'falling withered' can all be accomodated in the same word 'oyyum'

In the sense of 'pulling' - kanRu kaal oyyum kadum suzhi neettham (akanAnURu 66)

In the sense of 'chasing away' - marudam saanRa malardalai viLai vayal seyyuL nArai oyyum makaLir - in the lands of marudam, in the fields of paddy grown, the women do chase away the birds nArai.

Here is a scene where in summer the leaves fall withered down. - vAdu pal akal ilai kOdaikku oyyum tEkku amal adukkatthu (akanAnURu 143)

Of course Tamil is one of the very interesting classical languages, in which we see the interactions of mind, language and nature in abundance. Perhaps we must coin a portmanteau word as 'in ellicit abundance' borrowing the part 'el' from Tamil 'el' meaning abumdance.

We are in the riches of 'el' dorado of words in our sweet Tamil.

'El'dorado of Tamil?

A rich man adorns himself with very many apparels. An able artist knows how to use the same material in so many ways.

A language should be rich and at the same time highly artistic. Only then such language can use various words for every distinct occasion and the same word in very many senses in different occasions. It is rare to see such languages in the linguistic spectrum of the world. Tamil is one such language, which is at the same time very rich in words and highly artistic in the use of them.

To illustrate this point I will take the word 'el' in Tamil.

This simple word of mono syllable carries about ten meanings. Is it believable? But it is so. And not only that - this same word carries diametrically opposite meanings also.

First we will take the meaning of 'el' - as 'light'. Kuruntokai 216 uses this word 'el' in this sense. - 'thodu aar el vaLai'

Again the same word 'el' also carries the meaning which is opposite in signification to 'light'. el = night. NaRRiNai 2 uses the word in this sense - ellitai neengum iLaiyon.

Again another shade - neither light nor night but evening when the twilight sets in. el - evening. KuRuntokai 275 uses the word in the sense of evening. - el Urc cErtarum ERutai inatthu.

Again the same word 'el' is also used to denote daytime. In AkanAnURu 266 'el' is used in the sense of daytime. - kaLLutaip peruncORRu el imizh anna

Again the same word 'el' also signifies the Sun. PuRanAnURu 157 uses it as - mImisai el padu pozhudin

'el is not only the Sun but also the sunlight or sunheat veyil. Pingalandai nigandu lists it as a synonym for 'veyil'

'el' has not still exhausted its meanings. 'el' can also mean the full day. naaL, which the nigandu lists.

All these are in one way understandable as signifying inter related things like light, day, sun, sunlight etc. But what to say, when the same word 'el' is used to denote the qualities like greatness or abundance.?

AkanAnURu 77 uses 'el in the sense of big, great, majestic - el vaLi alaikkum iruL kUr maalai

And Perunkathai 33 uses it as abundance - el oLip paavai

What is so awesome is the range of meanings both opposite in signification and falling beyond the major registry of meanings.

Such was the original Tamil, voracious in vocabulary and yet again adept in using the words.

Is it the 'el' dorado of Tamil ?

* 

New Paradigm

India is a land of religions. So many paths and so many peoples, so many mentalities. And from the hoary past many spiritual prescriptions gather unto themselves suitable votaries and devotees. Yogis, real or professed, have never been rare at any given time. Sometimes an engulfing personality sweeps the stage and the history twists around them for a moment. And always for a moment before the flow gyrates back to its stream. Perhaps such a moment was the advent of Sri Ramakrishna. Is it not? Or is it totally unique? I think it is unique in the history of human thought, the advent of Sri Ramakrishna and more so, the publication of the noumenon viz., Sri Ramakrishna to the world in the form of Vivekananda, the Phenomenon.

Of course the closest parallel happens to be the ancient and puranic pair Nara Narayana. To be the Master and to be the Disciple in the self-same incarnation. But it is just an happy parallel and remains only such without explaining very much the uniqueness of the modern event. It is a habit of thought with us to match the new with the old, however distant and however strange. And it is a favorite theme with us to reiterate that the time and hence the events are always cyclical, the old repeats itself. 

But I think it will be a lot more effective towards understanding, if we, for a turn, are able to shuffle off these parametric approaches and take the events as unique in themselves. Nothing wrong with the old parameters, but we scarcely understand their dynamic meanings, which should have been alive at least in the minds of some past masters of theology, though not in recent times but definitely in the relevant periods of the past. 

Sri Ramakrishna and Vivekananda form the text and the commentary in themselves. One illustrates and the other explains. One intuits the meanings through life and the other illustrates by language and logic, the meanings imbibed. The Old happens anew and the Modern rediscovers its roots. The transcendental immortalizes itself in the transitory life and the temporal search finds its fulfillment in encountering the Eternal. It is a single happening janus-faced or janus-phased. 

I think it is only in understanding Vivekananda in Sri Ramakrishna and again Sri Ramakrishna in Vivekananda that the modern India's self-discovery becomes complete. And this self-education has never become such a task of Nationalism in any past ages as it has become a necessity in our times. That is why I say we must keep away the old parameters apart for a turn and approach afresh our New Manifesto, which comprises all Nationalism, Spirituality and Universality in one. 

*** 

Falling a prey..

It was dusk turning to night. In the streets of Srirangam some boys were heatingly talking on sundry topics. Suddenly some feud cropped up between the two of them. One was myself and the other was one boy, a little older than myself. The topic was 'Can one see God?'

My opponent was vehement that one cannot. I was categorical that such a thing was really possible. Have I not read in an old text book of 1941, my father's high school reader, in an essay on Sri Ramakrishna, the golden saying of Sri R that if a person sincerely weeps for God for three days, surely he will see God? What more certainty one needs? And what this boy is saying it cannot be? I became an intense advocate for Sri Ramakrishna's words and the issue went to an old lady, grandma of one of our friends. She heard him out first. And again I was stating my case and presenting references from that old high school reader and the assurance of the Sage of Dakshineswar. What she thought escapes me even now. But she pronounced me as the victor and hastily went into her quarters. From that moment, knowingly unknown to me, I was slowly being won over by 'Ramkishto'.

In the following years I was buying little books of him, Vivekananda and others. And in my ninth standard, I had already started one 'Sri Ramakrishna Vivekananda Sangam' gathering my little associates and juniors, conducting regular evening congregations of us, small boys only, much to the dismay of un-understanding elders and street-folks. Of course the venture was short lived. But my 'sangam' with Sri Ramakrishna, Vivekananda, Holy Mother and Sister Nivedita was growing day by day in the company of a new friend Dilip.

It has been a continuing education all through down this time and I am opening this blog to my inexpert engagement with their spiritual message. And why not?

Understanding Sri Ramakrishna

Imagine you are going to a remote village. There you come across one innocent person, whom even the locals treat as a simpleton. What will be your reaction towards him and his gestures and expressions. He will appear totally queer and you will look at him with all sympathy, because you have heard that he is quite artless and innocent and even mad seen in practical terms and not only that on seeing directly and forming initial opinions you also come to like conclusions about him.

But suddenly while talking to him and reading into his communications you all of a sudden realise that somehow he had been to the best scientific research institution and knows about the modern physics theory of multiverse. How did he come to know that? How did he first of call go there? But confidently he says and tries to explain to you in his own bizarre, uneducated and illiterate tongue. You can only laugh at his expressions, which are very local and slang and worth all ridicule. But you feel there is a ring of truth in his claims and that he is terribly sincere both in his claims and also in his reporting. JUST think about your own reactions at this moment and retain that impression fast in your mind. You will need it for something else.

That mad man of Dakshineswar, that Chota Chatterji, who had been a priest of Kali temple there, would have created exactly like impressions on the mind of the young modern boy of Calcutta, Noren, or Narendranath. And what would have been the mindset of Narendra at that moment and many years following before he was able to see the full personality of the villager.

It is a short story in itself ! 

We can derive immense benefit only by understanding Sri Ramakrishna. But mostly we exhaust ourselves by worshiping and prayers. Not that such worship should not be done but understanding him more and more is what is needed if we want to transform really. By saying that he was God Incarnate we can scarcely understand him. We have to take him as a man and approach him and fail in that attempt. Otherwise simply saying that he was God and he came to fulfill a mission and whatever he did it was only a drama - all these mythologizing and hagiography will not take us anywhere