Bhakti Song 515 – Give Up Asking

கேட்பதை விட்டேன்

 

அடுத்தவர் அனுபவம் நமக்கும் ஏற்காது

அவர் கொண்ட ஆனந்தம் நமக்கும் புரியாது

அவரவர் தமக்கு உகந்ததைத் தேடணும்

அதன்வழி ஓடி இறைவனை அடையணும்

 

பிறர் புசிக்க என்பசி போகாது

பிறர் சொல்ல என்மனம் அடைந்துவிடாது

குதிரைக்குத் தாகம் இல்லா வரையில்

குளத்தில் முக்கினும் நீர் குடிக்காது

 

என்மனம் அறிந்தவன் என்வழி வந்தான்

என்தேவை எதுவென அவனும் அறிந்தான்

ன்னுளம் அதற்கென ஏங்கிய பின்னே

என்னுளம் இருந்திட என்னிடம் வந்தான்

 

அதனை அறிவால் ஆராய்ந்தும் பார்த்தேன்

அதனைப் புரிய நூல்பல படித்தேன்

மேற் கொண்டு அறியப் பலரிடம் கேட்டேன்

என்னுளே நானும் வாதிட்டுப் பார்த்தேன்

 

ஆயினும் இவை ஒன்றும் உதவிடவில்லை

அவன் கொண்ட கருணையை விளக்கவும் இல்லை

இதுஏன் என்று அவனையே கேட்டேன்

இதற்கு அவனும் பதில்தர வில்லை

 

கேள்விகள் கேட்பதை நிறுத்திய பின்னே

கேள்விகள் அற்ற பதிலாய் வந்தான்

அந்தப் பதிலை உணர்ந்த பின்னே

பதிலற்ற கேள்விகள் கேட்பதை விட்டேன்

 

மத்திகிரி, 12-9-16, இரவு, 8.35

 

 

English Translation

 

Other’s experience is not acceptable to us

we cannot understand their joy

each one should seek what is proper for her

and should reach God through that process

 

My hunger won’t go if others eat for me

My mind won’t receive because others shared

until the horse feels thirst

it won’t drink even if we push its head in water

 

The One who knows my heart came on my path

and He understood what is my need

Once my heart too longed for that

He came to dwell within me

 

I analysed it through my reason

and to understand it I read many books

And asked many further to know about it

and even I debated about it within me

 

yet none of them were useful to me

I never understood His compassion

Then I asked Him ‘Why” this happened (to me)

but no answer came from Him

 

Once I stopped asking questions

He came as the answer which does not have any question

once I understood that answer

I stopped asking questions which do not have answer

 

Mathigiri, 12-9-16, 8.35 pm.

 

As I was taking notes from ‘Radical Universalism’ (Dr. Frank Gaetano Morales, Ph.D. Does Hinduism Teach That All Religions Are the Same? A Philosophical Critique of Radical Universalism) I was very much impressed by the way the author presented his view.  But at the end he too become dogmatic in his view by insisting that accepting the authority of the Veda is the mark of a true Hindu.  The following is my response to his view:

Thus, any Indian who rejects the authority of the Veda is obviously not a Hindu – regardless of their birth. While an American, Canadian, Russian, Brazilian, Indonesian or Indian who does accept the authority of the Veda obviously is a Hindu. One is Hindu, not by race, but by commitment.—p. 6 ibid.

A strange view which I find difficult to accept. Trying to fix Hindu identity based only on the authority of scripture cannot hold valid for various sampradayas and other traditions which are part of the Pan-Hindu phenonmena. Take for example of Siddha tradition, particularly that of Tamilnadu. Let me allow Prof. Ganapathy speak about them:

…The Tamil Siddhas are not system builders; their whole technique is to jolt people out of their intellectual ruts and their conventional, barren, morality.  They make fun of logic and metaphysics.  They turn orthodox philosophy upside down in order to make it look absurd. They are the ‘untethered’, non-conformist, spiritual aspirants, yearning for a direct and natural approach to, and a more intense experience of, the absolute truth. It is not simply sruti or smrti which they reject, but the authority of scripture as such—the value and prestige of the scripture which remains the privilege of a few in Hinduism….(p. 5) The Tamil Siddhas may be considered as ‘scriptureless’ or ‘bookless’ or nirgrantha school of Hinduism, as they are detached from any scriptural authority.— Tamil Siddhas, New Delhi, Indian Council of Philosophical Research, 1993. pp. 5-6

… They {Siddhas} are not atheists or agnostics as is commonly believed.  They believe in God, but not a God of this or that religion. For most of them there is a God, a Siva, without any limitation or attributes, Siva is grammatically and philosophically an impersonal conception. The real name for ‘Siva’ is ‘It’ or ‘Adu’ or ‘Thatness’ or ‘Suchness’.25  A genuine Siddha is beyond atheism and theism alike.—ibid. p. 16

25. Refer Karai Siddhar, Golden Lay (Kanaga Vaippu).  Nungambakkam: Siddhasram. N.d. 78; p. 145

…A Veda is like a finger pointing at the noon of liberation; it would be a calamity if one took the finger for the moon. Siddhas want us to be free from the fixist slumber or unrealized description of truth. A description can never in itself transmit experience….—ibid. p. 16

Above all what is claimed as ‘historically accepted standard’ is also decided by the elitist and not by lay people.  These kinds of statements are framed and superimposed by scholars on lay people. But thankfully they neither know about it or bother to know such artificial definition about ‘who a Hindu is’?

Back to Dr. Morales:

In pre-Christian times, avaidika schools were clearly identified by Hindu authors as being specifically Buddhism, Jainism and the atheistic Charvaka school, all of whom did not accept the Veda. These three schools were unanimously considered non-Vedic, and thus non-Hindu (they certainly are geographically Indian religions, but they are not theologically/philosophically Hindu religions)….—p. 6

Interestingly the same tradition [or call it Vaishnavism] included Buddha as part of the avatara of Vishnu. Thus while Buddha was a Hindu, Buddhism is non-Hindu.

According to my understanding the Hindu identity is decided not by holding the vedic authority but birth identity. As Tagore rightly said in his famous novel Gora that birth is the entity that decides the Hindu identity and not holding any particular view about a Scripture among so many scriptures of Hinduism. If Radical Hinduism is wrong this kind of Elitist Hinduism is a joke.

Sucharita said, “Baba, why should I declare that I am an (p.418) insignificant creature disconnected from my race and country?  Why can’t I say I am a Hindu?”

Poresh : “…This community is not for all mankind—it is only for those who happen to be born as Hindus.”

Sucharita said, “All communities are like that”.

Poresh said, “No. No major community is like that. The main door of the Muslim community is open to every human being. The Khrishtan {Christian} community also welcomes everybody.  If I want to become British, that is not entirely impossible. I could become part of British society by living in England and by adhering to its customs—I wouldn’t even have to become a Khrishtan {Christian} for this. Abhimanu* knew how to enter the battle formation but not how to come out of it—for Hindus it is just the opposite. The entrance to their society is wholly closed but there are a hundred or thousand ways of leaving it.”— GORA—RABINDRANATH  TAGORE; Translated from Bangal with notes by SUJIT MUKHERJEE; Introduction by Meenakshi Mukherjee; New Delhi, Sahitya Akademi,  (1997) Second edition 2001. p. 418-9

 

Then, stopping taking the notes I wrote this song immediately within five minutes and continue my work.

*Abhimanu, son of Arjuna knew how to enter the Chakkraviewha (formation of the troops like wheel) but he does not know how to come out.  So though he managed to enter into it finally get killed as he does not know how to come out of it.  Because when Arjuna was explaining about it to his pregnant wife Subhadraabout the viewha she fell asleep when he explained about how to come out. So Abhimanu who was listening cannot complete the hearing as his mother slept in the second part.