Perceptions of Bhakti

 

bahunam janmanam ante

jnanavan mam prapadyate

vasudevah sarvam iti

sa mahatma su-durlabhah

March 2020. Even as the first case of Covid-19 was finding its way to the front pages in India, we were travelling very close to where the first major outbreak was reported – Agra was not very far from Gwalior where we were. Our major focus of that photography tour was the Bateshwar group of temples. Since it had gained popularity with archaeologist Muhammad’s interviews and write-ups on its restoration, reconstruction efforts, and the striking, beautiful temple complex unlike any other in the country, photographers throng the site. As long as we were walking around the ruins my fellow travellers were fine. But our young driver was over enthusiastic about taking us to a very famous temple in the neighbourhood, where local pilgrims go in large numbers, the Shanichar temple near Morena. It is like many of the new temples in the North, no big plan, no architecture, no fineness. Our friends were trying to dodge the visit as much as possible but our driver wouldn’t take no for an answer and at the end of the day he had driven us there, to the Shanichar temple. In a group of around ten, I was the only woman and in all we were only two “believers” in the group. Some of the methods of the worship are the same, either Thirunallar, Shani Singnapur or the Morena Shanichar temple, the oil becomes the main offering. I did buy a bottle and went in to pray.

One of my journalist friends who was in the group was pretty vocal – “this is gross” he said. He thought the temples were okay as long as they were ruins, which has been a very common expression that I have been used to in the last ten odd years, since the social media posts and heritage tourism has taken a new avatar. Art history classes and new class of heritage enthusiasts who want to “examine” temples and not interested in the temple per se seems to be growing as far I could observe. So, this colleague was no exception. He asked when did Hinduism become so gross, it was all fine as long as it was lofty Vedanta. I tried to reason with him about the upasana margas. As he hailed from Kerala, I asked him about various shlokas Shankara Bhagavatpada had composed, his pilgrimages, his establishment of worship at temples as far away as Badrinath and Kedarnath. He was denying the whole thing, he can’t accept that an Adi Shankara could approve of something “gross” like temple worship.

 Though this phenomenon has been making me ponder over the metropolitan transformation for quite some time, the immediate provocation is this recent article in the OPEN magazine - https://openthemagazine.com/essay/the-great-disillusionment/

 The headline succinctly captures not just a western view, but also that of a Hindu born and brought up in India – their disillusionment with Hinduism, its fall from the lofty Vedantic worldview to the “gross” temple worship and the rituals. When I try to discuss this, sometimes I earn the wrath of the Vedantins, who misunderstand me as anti-Vedanta. But that is not the case as I try to point out – the Ramanuja sampradaya I belong to is also a Vedantic school, in fact it is called Ubhaya Vedanta school as it blends the twin strains of the Veda-Vedanta school in the Sanskrit Vedas and the Dravida Vedas (the Alwar poetry). In fact, the major work Swami Ramanuja during his lifetime was to find the only available copy of the Bodhayana vritti (the commentary on the Vedanta Sutras by Bodhayana), to write his own commentary, the Sri Bashyam that would become the most important document for expounding the Vishistadvaita. While the Brahma gnanis among the sampradaya continued the tradition of that particular strain of Vaishnavism continuing erudite tattva vicharas, texts, carrying forward the Vedantic legacy, the other strand of Divya Prabandham chants, commentaries on it, recitation at temples and homes, the daily pujas, the temple worship, festivals all continued, alive till this day. The tradition of writing philosophical treatises as well as composing shlokas continues. There was no tension between the two strands, in general. Individuals may have had an issue with one or the other interpretations, works, sadhanas might have differed. But, as the west continued the work of Indological research and as it moved from the agnosticism and atma vicharam of the world war years which is what an Eliot’s ‘The Waste Land’ signified, to the post-war atheism, the curriculum also moved from the Schopenhauer and Heidegger days to the theism departments, religious studies, Bhakti movement studies etc., This is when the conflict between the abstract and the practiced perhaps came about. I see papers on women frolicking in the waters of Chandra Pushkarini at Srirangam on tirtavari (The avbrata snana as the concluding ritual of the Brahmotsavas) written pretty simplistically as some erotic expedition to papers on Yaanai Thiruman (The legal battles over religious marks on the temple elephant at Kanchipuram Varadaraja Perumal temple) case and Dosai viniyogam (tradition of distributing set volume of prasada after naivedya at the temples to those who are eligible). It becomes a complex web to untangle at this point. Just as the west was waking up to the Alwar poetry, it came with  a greater emphasis on “following the Sangam akam (the akam poetry involving, personal, sensuous expression) model” and clubbing of saint poets across the country into a monolith of a “Bhakti movement” and trivializing to the point of translating Kshetrayya padams into a book titled ‘When God was the customer’. There has been no looking back since then. From the ‘60s to ‘80s while the theology schools made Hindu texts and religion part of the curriculum to the days when the Ayodhya movement picked up steam in India.

By then the west was turning more atheist, many abandoning the Church, and one point which actually answers the question the Open author asks is captured well, in one of his own sentences –  “In a scientific materialist culture that does not care for deities or the supernatural, Bud­dhism mirrors the West’s contemplative atheism.” When I see an intro in Diana Eck’s book on Indian pilgrimage where she openly says that she wanted to delay her book since she did not want to be seen, to be contributing to what was happening with the Ayodhya movement in India, to some western academics of Indian origin openly tell me (in an interaction post 2014 elections) that “this is what it is. They see India getting hegemonistic” to the question on why the professor asserted that “yoga is a la carte, everyone picks what one wants” making it universal and not Indian. On why there should be no term like “Indian influence on South, South East Asia, but it should be changed to mutual contributions”. That assertion came up after two-day conference on Indian influence in South East Asia where none of the speakers coming from Thailand, Cambodia, Sri Lanka, a French scholar, all presenting papers as the topic suggestion, none challenging it. It was the Indian origin professor in the US who would advocate changing the term “Indian influence” because western academia feared India would get hegemonistic. This also combines with the growing Buddhism studies in Western India and some other circles. The ritual worship and temple traditions pitted against atheism, is a stark contrast. It is not just the rise of “political Hinduism” that is to blame for the west ignoring the Hindu intellectual traditions, but it is a conscious effort to delink the devotional Hinduism from the Vedantic traditions and the convenient branding of one into the camp of “Hindutva” (I have attended conferences where they tried to banish Hindutva, but none could come up with a definition of Hindutva and they all ended up using Hindu and Hindutva interchangeably, making Hindutva just a term to express their Hinduphobia) and the other as “The Hindu”.  The temple studies also branches off into categories of “aesthetics” and “temple architecture”, and unfortunately they leave behind the spirit of a Anand Coomarasamy though the studies cannot do without him. The spirit with which a Stella Kramrisch or Alice Boner studied Hindu temples is lost in many of the temple studies and heritage walks at present (this is purely a personal observation, and I am using my liberty to express it since I have been a regular traveller, doing occasional walks and tours in groups too).

If we say for centuries the Hindu traditions has had no political associations, it is incorrect. The personification of Bharat Mata during the independence movement or its precursor in the rebellion of 1857 which had overtly religious issues, the Ganeshotsavas of Lokamanya Tilak, the incorporation of political elements in our performance traditions, have we ever been fully divorced in terms of politics and dharma? The 20-21^st century attempt to “secularise” everything from music, dance to heritage also makes a buffoon out of a practising Hindu. Couple of days ago I heard a promotional clip of a lady who promotes Kabir through festivals across India. In her speech she makes a reference to “satsang” to mock at it. This exactly has been the urban phenomena. The Kabir festivals proclaim Kabir’s Rama as not being Ayodhya Rama. The Kabir festivals are pitted against the “satsangs” if I interpret her. Isn’t Kabir festival, the coming together of agnostics who want to believe only in his nirguni bhajans also a satasang? The urban English educated minds move away from the temple – ritual worship, this combines with academic research and clinical deconstruction of bhakti poetry (movement), heritage studies devoid of devotion, to create a strong wedge – as some have called it in political terms, India vs Bharat. In fact, we have seen this evolve. Personally, I can say how these have had a strong influence on us. As college students, influenced by Eliot we went and bought copies of Brihadaranyaka Upanishad. The Maharaj as RKM counter laughed at us – “all of you come here asking only for Brihadaranyaka, all Eliot influence!” Now I can visualise what the Maharaj thought, and I feel the same. The India vs Bharat divide is strong. Unless we find a way to infuse the religious studies with bhakti, to see the Itihasas as shastras, and Puranas as not just myths, we are going to see the divide get deeper. Our generation, we saw text books give equal space to Kabir, Tulsi and Surdas, but in the urban milieu I live, Tulsi has become sort of villain after Ayodhya movement, and Surdas has faded away except for “Bhakti studies”.

 We see surging crowds at Kumbh Mela, Varanasi, at all pilgrim centres and that image makes us believe all is well with Saguna Bhakti. The rate at which we are getting urbanized, influencers seek to create narratives, how long before the phenomenon of the metros, how long before the battle of perceptions gather strength? Our Bhakti has never been divorced from philosophy. The foundations of temple worship and Bhakti have been deeply rooted in philosophy and detailed delineation of various aspects. It is not difficult to reorient perceptions on Bhakti, provided we do not turn indifferent to it as being “gross” or neglect it because of certain “political” influences. We cannot let this perception battle go astray when a section of the country is looking at the Ram Janmabhoomi temple as a Renaissance moment.