Sabarimala: The Past and Present is a write-up appeared in The Indian Express by Dr. Rajan Gurukkal, a Communist and loyalist to some political leadership. He suggests that a ‘ban’ on entry of women is as recent as in 1991. (Gurukkal conveniently hides from the readers the fact that there exist oral traditions, authentic records and documents such as the Memoir of the Survey of the Travancore and Cochin states by Lieutenants Ward and Conner, in the public domain that belie his claim.) But then this is typical of the Communists, of presenting lies as convincing truths. What is said is record about the ban: but the implication presented is that women entering was normal prior to that. This makes the statement wrong, because it misleads, and is an archetype Communist reductionism.
To him, Sabarimala is a ‘cult’ spot of forest dwellers, with a tutelary deity. What else shall be a deity? But certainly not tutelary alone, but indeed much more than that, to the needy; the faithful. How the shrine is placed as in 15th century in the light of the legend of Ayyappa becoming one with the already existing deity Ayyanar need to be told, nonetheless, antiquity has nothing to do with faith as well as aspiration for transcendence. It is just a historian’s say, of form in some form, but certainly not in content.
Communists often call Vedic tradition ‘agamic’ again in the struggle of misleading through reductionism to celebrate ignorance of the listeners. This is another gimmick of the communists to celebrate the unknowledge of the people with whom they speak to and also through the usage of unfamiliar expressions to deliberately confuse them. They achieve their ‘hegemony’ over the Miserable to continue deceiving them to win their support and sacrifices. Originally, agamic is a Greek expression implying parthenogenesis, and parthenogenesis itself is its primary instance. Agamic in Bharatiya knowledge tradition is an expression coined to imply of things those came, implying came from knowledge texts, but actually implying whatever is convenient to the reducer. To say ‘agamic’ gives one some kind of freedom to claim lies, or in the least, good nonsense.
For Marxian philosophy (materialistic dialectics), contradiction is cardinal. Neo-Communists blindly follow this tenet, and struggle to create contradictions, which, to their belief, is necessary for communism to go on. They believe that without conflict and contradiction Communism shall become dead or stale. Neo-Communists discard Marx prior to the ‘epistemological break’ suggested by Althusser and concentrate only on the ‘revolutionary Marx’ instead of a ‘humanist Marx’. It is here that they create contradictions and conflicts in their desperate beliefs that Communism shall otherwise not survive. This is injustice to Marx himself, by taking him partially only, again through a neo-reductionism. Thus, it becomes natural for them to create distinctions, contradictions and maintain them.
The write-up tries to create a distinction between ‘low caste’ and ‘high caste’, in the typical Kerala style of making an avarna–savarna binary. It is suggested that Sabarimala used to be a temple (the term temple is not used) for the low caste, and initially, the high castes were not interested in it. The temple tantric rituals, which is exclusive to Kerala temples were not applied to Sabarimala, as ‘no one from the tantric tradition was interested’. The Thazhamon family’s involvement is reduced by saying that they were not ‘very Vedic’ like the autochthone Tantri families. The suggestion goes to say that it is only slowly and subsequently that the upper caste took reign of Sabarimala. But then this suggestion also makes another Communist method of making conflict and contradiction, to imply that the higher caste deprived the lower caste of not only their earlier possession of the temple, but also of their rights. Some Communist enthusiasts could develop this into conflict among lower and higher castes concerning Sabarimala.
In 1950, the temple was burned and idol broken. The writer says with authority that it was poachers who destroyed the then temple. What is working behind the complete destruction of Sabarimala from then to the present is kept hidden from people by those who are responsible for all these themselves. In all likelihood, these cannot remain concealed forever. The write-up also suggests that the fraternity between low and high caste was destroyed by Brahmanical influences. This is just another reductionistic aggression towards contradiction and conflict. As a matter of fact, the very epistemology of the Vedopanishadic knowledge tradition is the ‘epistemology of co-existence’. Now to understand and appreciate this epistemology, one must have been a traveller through the Vedopanishadic knowledge tradition right along, not the ones who a take peeps to make judgements of convenience.
There is also a distinction drawn between menstruation among the low-castes and high castes to plead that menstruation is celebrated among the lower castes as an indication of fertility with the implication that the high castes treat it only as impurity. I think that everyone shall know that this is not the case at all, without any explanations. Hindu as such has similar perspective to the thing in question here, but here again, distinctions are being made towards the conflict conspiracy.
Researches in social sciences have a tendency. They first ‘problematise’ something to study that to make solutions. They would also ‘import’ ‘theories’ to make frames to stuff everything into the made-up frame to find desired solutions. This, precisely becomes the reductionistic attitude of the Communists. Distinctions are made between savarna and avarna, dalit and non-dalit, feminism and non-feminism, and the list shall go endless given improvisations. Then some environment, the Periyar Tiger Reserve, and an accusation of Sabarimala encroaching the reserve forests. Further, those who try to protect Sabarimala are termed as ‘culturally uprooted’ masses, which becomes very particularly interesting.
We had been seeing persistent attempts from certain authorities to somehow destroy (destroy they think) Sabarimala temple. As to why is this being done, there are many speculations available, but nothing for certain. Nonetheless it remains a fact that there are some people after Sabarimala, it is evident from the fire and destruction of the temple in 1950, the Nilakkal movement, and now this commotion and drama. One thing is for sure, there are more things than what could be seen at the surface level.
The Vedic Dharma is not based on one single text and its given perspectives. Semitic religions are confined to given norms, book, as well as permitted interpretations. Communism had also inherited these phenomena, they are rigid to what are instructed or taught to them, with an impression that they are their convictions. It seems that at ground level, which is political level, they use these theories to ‘win’ what they desire, through hook or crook literally, and through manifold lies. We can experience these things in context of Sabarimala, as many lies and deceits are getting exposed on a routine regularly. They seem to ignore the point that lies are effective if and only if it appears as truth, and otherwise, it bounces back.
There are many deities in the Vedic Dharma, each one distinct with distinct rituals etc. To that extent, each temple shall be unique in a functional manner and in each place of worship, a devotee has to function as per the functional rituals of the given temple. Vedic Hindu society always evolved from within, and never through revolutions from without. Renaissance is meaningless in Bharatiya context, and those who wish for communism through Marx shall ever remain hybrids in their minds, not being able to live up to communism and at the same time not being able to understand the Vedopanishadic knowledge tradition. When one does not have clarity at the level of concepts, one remains confused, and shall keep confusing his followers who, if at all shall realise ever, shall be too late for any reparations. This is what is happening in Sabarimala issue also.
It is foolish to speak of gender equality within the Vedic Dharma for two reasons simple. One, the Vedas themselves have contributions from many Rishikas, or female Rishis as Suktas. Women and men were ever equal. On the other hand, the inequality of women originates with Greek philosophy and Plato in particular, travelled through Augustine the theologian to shape Christian morality as well as European attitude towards women. Feminism and gender questions become appropriate in such situations, and not in Bharat. Two, we in Bharat also have puckers in our society through encroachments from without. But it is never the situation that we shall need their models to repair our society which is in a revolutionary manner, we have our own evolutionary reparative methods from within the Vedopanishadic knowledge tradition itself through our own seers.
Samskara is translated as culture into English. When Samskara is purification of qualities, the Sanskrit term falls well in place. In this sense, culture should also be ‘refined human existence’ from Bharatiya perspective. Archetype Swayam Sevaks are never ‘culturally uprooted’ people, one must at least have some peripherical passing awareness about Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh to make comments about it. Cultural uprooted existence is far flung with Swayamsevaks, and they are not problem inventors, problem creators, as well as conflict and contradiction makers. One thing more to ponder upon. RSS is active in every nook and corner of Bharat, and if it is in the RSS to make problems, it should have been the case everywhere. But we see problems only where Communists exist, and nowhere.
(Dr. Rajan Gurukkal is my personal friend and we had long agreed to disagree.)
Discussion about this post