12-07-2004, 12:03 AM
Crisis before Brahminism
Human Voices /Gautam Siddharth
What happens when politics, which emphasises differences, comes into confrontation with dharma, a unifying force? The arrest and incarceration of Kanchi Kamakoti Peetham's Shankaracharya Jayendra Saraswati is more than just a war within Hinduism, between its aastik and naastik followers. It is about votes and filthy lucre. As Sunday Pioneer's Astrowise columnist, Mr Bharat Bhushan, wrote last Sunday, whether or not there is truth in the allegations against the Shankaracharya, the fact that a high Hindu religious figure has been subjected to such ignominy itself defines a moment of crisis for both the country and its singular unifying faith - represented particularly by Brahminism.
There appears another co-relation between Shankaracharya's arrest and potential social unrest. With Bihar, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh and Andhra Pradesh - Uttar Pradesh could now well be added to the list - facing Naxalite violence, such a development will only fuel cynicism in people's mind in regard to religion and act as cannon-fodder for Maoist propaganda against faith.
While the Naxalites may find it easier to recruit "backward" youth, who would be more disillusioned than ever with the "Brahminical" religion, the Tamil Nadu Police's action - questions will always be raised whether it was at the behest of the State's political leadership - will engender another extreme reaction - only shades of which we have seen so far - in the far right. Just as there will be sections of society which will get disenchanted with religion, there shall be those who will perceive in the Shankaracharya's arrest, an assault on Hinduism, see it as a conspiracy to humiliate it, and rally around with a cause that could create more social tension.
This is not the first time that religion has been used by the political class to divide society towards electoral ends. Indira Gandhi had done the same with Sikhism, the consequence of which was Bluestar and a series of political assassinations, one of which claimed her life and ended only with the killing of the Chief Minister of Punjab in 1994, Beant Singh.
To matters a little removed, however, how does Hinduism connect our vast and diverse country? Which strain of Sanatan Dharma finds an unmistakable resonance in every part of the land? It is fact that no matter which region of the country you are in, the only "caste" of Hindus present everywhere is of Brahmins. Brahminism has been reviled - indeed, to do so in recent years has assumed the nature of a fad with large sections of the cosmopolitan intelligentsia - as exploitative and something degenerate and regressive. But take Brahminism away from Hindu society and you are left with a body without its soul.
While there may have been great cause in Tamil Nadu to rise against orthodox Brahminism with all its attendant evils sprouting from shuddhi, like untouchability, it is equally a fact that the institution of Brahminism led by the Shankaracharyas has undertaken social reforms at crucial stages of India's social history.
One of Adi Shankaracharya's (eighth century) finest poems, 'Manisha Panchakam', was inspired by his dialogue with a Chandala, a member of the lowest caste. Once, when Shankara was on his way to the temple after a bath in the Ganga, he found a Chandala with four dogs blocking his path. His caste prejudice flared up when the Chandala refused to step aside, and asked him to do so. But the Chandala asked: "If there is only one existence, what is it that you want to drive away: My body or my soul? If it is my body, both your and mine are made up of the same physical elements.
But if it is my soul, it is also no different from yours. How can therefore be any distinctions of caste and creed?" Filled with remorse, Shankara prostrated himself before the Chandala. The bard in him sang: "He who has learnt to see one existence everywhere/ he is my master - be he a Brahmin or a Chandala."
Again, when Goswami Tulsidas recreated Valmiki's Ramayan in Awadhi, the language of commoners, he was denounced by the purblind Brahminical order of the day. It was the then Shankaracharya who gave dharma's sanction to the transcreation of Ramayana, which reached out to a vast populace. It was a revolutionary movement, a reinvention of such brilliance that only Sanatan Dharma was capable of.
Ever since it came into existence, the institution of Shankaracharya has functioned as the confluence between grihastha and sanyasa ashramas. An incredibly subtle, invisible tapestry has been woven into Hindu social fabric as a result. As vitraagis, a class of people beyond raag (attachment) - who have upheld virtues like satya (truth), ahimsa (non-violence), asteya (above stealing), aparigraha (renunciation), and brahmacharya (devotion to other ethical principles) - Brahmins have for aeons been considered ideals worth emulating in Hindu society.
They have been the fulcrum of Hindu social order and upholders of heritage, and this is what makes India a continuous civilisation. Brahmins have epitomised the Swami-Sanyasi tradition that has periodically cleansed and purged Hindu society of its ills and exploitative elements, and though there have been occasions in the past when their authority has been sought to be undermined, by kings and commoners alike, the institution has not just survived but emerged more robust than before.
The arrest of Shankaracharya Jayendra Saraswati may unfold one of the gravest crisis ever before Brahminism and, by extension, Hinduism, but its resilience will - make no mistake - eventually be measured by its own peculiar genius to surmount it.
Human Voices /Gautam Siddharth
What happens when politics, which emphasises differences, comes into confrontation with dharma, a unifying force? The arrest and incarceration of Kanchi Kamakoti Peetham's Shankaracharya Jayendra Saraswati is more than just a war within Hinduism, between its aastik and naastik followers. It is about votes and filthy lucre. As Sunday Pioneer's Astrowise columnist, Mr Bharat Bhushan, wrote last Sunday, whether or not there is truth in the allegations against the Shankaracharya, the fact that a high Hindu religious figure has been subjected to such ignominy itself defines a moment of crisis for both the country and its singular unifying faith - represented particularly by Brahminism.
There appears another co-relation between Shankaracharya's arrest and potential social unrest. With Bihar, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh and Andhra Pradesh - Uttar Pradesh could now well be added to the list - facing Naxalite violence, such a development will only fuel cynicism in people's mind in regard to religion and act as cannon-fodder for Maoist propaganda against faith.
While the Naxalites may find it easier to recruit "backward" youth, who would be more disillusioned than ever with the "Brahminical" religion, the Tamil Nadu Police's action - questions will always be raised whether it was at the behest of the State's political leadership - will engender another extreme reaction - only shades of which we have seen so far - in the far right. Just as there will be sections of society which will get disenchanted with religion, there shall be those who will perceive in the Shankaracharya's arrest, an assault on Hinduism, see it as a conspiracy to humiliate it, and rally around with a cause that could create more social tension.
This is not the first time that religion has been used by the political class to divide society towards electoral ends. Indira Gandhi had done the same with Sikhism, the consequence of which was Bluestar and a series of political assassinations, one of which claimed her life and ended only with the killing of the Chief Minister of Punjab in 1994, Beant Singh.
To matters a little removed, however, how does Hinduism connect our vast and diverse country? Which strain of Sanatan Dharma finds an unmistakable resonance in every part of the land? It is fact that no matter which region of the country you are in, the only "caste" of Hindus present everywhere is of Brahmins. Brahminism has been reviled - indeed, to do so in recent years has assumed the nature of a fad with large sections of the cosmopolitan intelligentsia - as exploitative and something degenerate and regressive. But take Brahminism away from Hindu society and you are left with a body without its soul.
While there may have been great cause in Tamil Nadu to rise against orthodox Brahminism with all its attendant evils sprouting from shuddhi, like untouchability, it is equally a fact that the institution of Brahminism led by the Shankaracharyas has undertaken social reforms at crucial stages of India's social history.
One of Adi Shankaracharya's (eighth century) finest poems, 'Manisha Panchakam', was inspired by his dialogue with a Chandala, a member of the lowest caste. Once, when Shankara was on his way to the temple after a bath in the Ganga, he found a Chandala with four dogs blocking his path. His caste prejudice flared up when the Chandala refused to step aside, and asked him to do so. But the Chandala asked: "If there is only one existence, what is it that you want to drive away: My body or my soul? If it is my body, both your and mine are made up of the same physical elements.
But if it is my soul, it is also no different from yours. How can therefore be any distinctions of caste and creed?" Filled with remorse, Shankara prostrated himself before the Chandala. The bard in him sang: "He who has learnt to see one existence everywhere/ he is my master - be he a Brahmin or a Chandala."
Again, when Goswami Tulsidas recreated Valmiki's Ramayan in Awadhi, the language of commoners, he was denounced by the purblind Brahminical order of the day. It was the then Shankaracharya who gave dharma's sanction to the transcreation of Ramayana, which reached out to a vast populace. It was a revolutionary movement, a reinvention of such brilliance that only Sanatan Dharma was capable of.
Ever since it came into existence, the institution of Shankaracharya has functioned as the confluence between grihastha and sanyasa ashramas. An incredibly subtle, invisible tapestry has been woven into Hindu social fabric as a result. As vitraagis, a class of people beyond raag (attachment) - who have upheld virtues like satya (truth), ahimsa (non-violence), asteya (above stealing), aparigraha (renunciation), and brahmacharya (devotion to other ethical principles) - Brahmins have for aeons been considered ideals worth emulating in Hindu society.
They have been the fulcrum of Hindu social order and upholders of heritage, and this is what makes India a continuous civilisation. Brahmins have epitomised the Swami-Sanyasi tradition that has periodically cleansed and purged Hindu society of its ills and exploitative elements, and though there have been occasions in the past when their authority has been sought to be undermined, by kings and commoners alike, the institution has not just survived but emerged more robust than before.
The arrest of Shankaracharya Jayendra Saraswati may unfold one of the gravest crisis ever before Brahminism and, by extension, Hinduism, but its resilience will - make no mistake - eventually be measured by its own peculiar genius to surmount it.