Kumbh Mela

From today starts the famous and one of the largest religious congregations of the world, the Kumbh Mela (the fair of the pot). This event attracts millions of people from across the world and this year it could be much more as it is also the Maha Kumbh, the Great Kumbh, which takes place once in twelve years.

This event, as we all know has its origins in the famous mythical episode of the Amrita-manthan or samudra-manthan (churning of the ocean). But what many might not know is the reason for the churning. According to a legend, once Lord Indra came across Sage Durvasa (better known for his infamous temper). On seeing Indra, Sage Durvasa took out a garland from his neck and gifted it to Indra. Indra in his arrogance put the garland on his elephant, who obviously unaware of its importance trampled it under its feet. Seeing this, Sage Durvasa was angry and cursed Indra that he and his ilk, i.e. the other gods would lose all their strength and the position, due to this act of arrogance.

Soon, the gods were devoid of any energy and strength and seeing this, the asuras, attacked them and got the better of the gods. The gods assembled and sought help from Lord Brahma, who suggested the churning of the ocean, from which, would emerge the celestial physician, Dhanwantri who could save them with his divine potion or nectar, better known as amrita, the elixir of immortality. However, for this they would need the help of the asuras who were very strong. A discussion was held between the gods and asuras and it was decided that all would get a share of the amrita.

On churning, many riches emerged and so did Dhanvantri with the pot of amrita. On seeing this, the asuras tried to gain control of the pot, but Vishnu took the form of Mohini, the enchantress and ran away with the pot. While Mohini was trying to save the pot from the asuras, the pot spilt some drops of the amrita on Allahabad, Haridwar, Ujjain and Nashik, which have become the famous places of the Kumbh fair. It is said that the gods and the asuras fought for twelve days, which was equivalent to the twelve years on earth to gain control of the pot.

In the war between the gods and the asuras, three gods, Sun, Moon and Jupiter played a very important role in protecting the pot from the asuras. Since then, the Kumbha Mela is held to commemorate this event, and the dates are calculated on the basis of the planetary positions of Sun, Moon and Jupiter. The four places where drops of nectar had been spilt, are supposed to acquire divine powers on these days and bathing in the rivers on these days, washes away all the sins and one can achieve salvation. The fair is held every four years in the above regions and every twelve year is the Maha-Kumbh, like the one which is being held in Allahabad this year.

I don’t know if the sins are washed away on this day or not, but the massive congregation of believers on this day has something to do with faith. Braving the chilling winter and dipping in the cold waters can only be an act of faith and hope for salvation. How many achieve salvation is a statistics for god to maintain, but the Kumbh is definitely a visual treat even for the non-believer. It must be something, which made Mark Twain, in 1895 to comment –

“It is wonderful, the power of a faith like that, that can make multitudes upon multitudes of the old and weak and the young and frail enter without hesitation or complaint upon such incredible journeys and endure the resultant miseries without repining. It is done in love, or it is done in fear; I do not know which it is. No matter what the impulse is, the act born of it is beyond imagination, marvellous to our kind of people, the cold whites.”

Some of the main dates for this year for bathing are as follows –

14 January – Makar Sankranti

27 January – Paush Purnima

6 February – Ekadashi Snan

10 February – Mauni Amavasya Snan (Main Bathing Day)

15 February – Basant Panchami Snan

17 February – Rath Saptami Snan

21 February – Bhisma Ekadashi Snan

25 February – Maghi Purnima Snan

For more on Makara Sankranti, read Makara Sankranti

Swami Vivekananda

On Swami Vivekananda's 150th Birth Anniversary, re-posting my article on him written a few months back -


Swami Vivekananda – an icon of Hidutva

Two Tales of Two Brothers

Let me tell you about an interesting observation. But first stories, which many of us might be quite familiar with.

The first one is from the epic Ramayan, related to the Kishkindha episode. Sugriv and Vali were brothers and Vali was the king of the vanars in the Kingdom of Kishkindha. He had a boon, that he would absorb half the strength of his opponent in a fight/battle. Once a demon by the name of Dundubi threatened him to a duel, but when Vali accepted it, he developed cold feet and ran away. Both Vali and Sugriv chased him till he entered into a cave. Before going inside the cave, Vali asked Sugriv to wait for him outside the cave and in case he saw blood coming out of the cave, then he should assume him to be dead and return to the kingdom and crown himself the King. After Vali had gone inside the cave, Sugriv heard loud sounds and soon he saw blood coming out of the cave. Sugriv assuming that his brother was dead, bolted the entrance of the cave with a boulder and came back to the kingdom to inform all that their King was dead and assumed the throne.

Soon Vali managed to kill the demon, and came back to his kingdom to see Sugriv crowned as a king. This enraged him and he rushed to kill Sugriv. When Sugriv tried to explain that he had done as instructed to him, Vali would not hear and rushed to kill him. Sugriv had no option but to escape from there and live in exile. Vali in the meanwhile also forcefully took Sugrivs’ main wife Ruma. Later when Ram and Lakshaman came there in search of Sita, they met Sugriv and assured him of their support.

As planned, Sugriv challenged Vali to a duel in the forest and while the two were fighting, Ram hid behind a tree and shot an arrow and killed Vali. This singular act is seen as an unfair blemish in an otherwise spotless character of Ram. (We will not get into the details of the unfairness and will leave the story here.)

In the epic Mahabharata, during the war of Kurukshetra, again two brothers were pitched against each other, Karna and Arjun. During the war, when Karna gets off the chariot, to release its wheel which was stuck in the ground, Krishna coaxes Arjuna to kill Karna, even though Karna was unarmed. This too is seen as an unfair act by Krishna and he has been criticised for the same.

Am I telling you stories that you know?

Well now for a very interesting comparison in both the tales related above.

In the first tale, Vali and Sugriv were brothers because they were born of same mother, Aruni, but not the same father. Vali was the son of Lord Indra and Sugriv was the son of Lord Surya. In this case, Ram, an incarnation of Lord Vishnu, sides with the son of Lord Surya to kill the son of Lord Indra.

In the second tale, Karna and Arjun are again bothers because they were born of the same mother, Kunti, but not the same father. Karna was the son of Lord Surya and Arjuna was the son of Lord Indra. In this case, Krishna, an avatar of Lord Vishnu again, sides with the son of Lord Indra, to kill the son of Lord Surya!

The first epic was written by Sage Valminki and the second was written by Sage Vyasa, but the similarities are too glaring.

• In both the cases, the fathers are Lord Indra and Lord Surya, the most important Vedic deities.
• In both cases, the driving force was Lord Vishnu in different incarnations
• In both cases, the death of one of the brothers is by unfair means.

What is more important is that what was done in the Ramayan was reversed in an effort to balance in Mahabharat, a poetic justice of sorts for the fathers, Indra and Surya!

Isn’t this interesting? Two epics, written by two different sages, during two different ages (Ramayan during Treta Yuga and Mahabharata during the Dwapar Yuga) but enabling a balance of justice.

Finally to conclude, Vali before dying is supposed to have told Ram that shooting him from behind and that too when he was fighting someone else was unfair. To avenge this unfairness, Ram allowed Vali to be reborn as the hunter Jara during the dwapar yuga (Mahabharata) who shoots an arrow at Krishna’s feet thinking him to be a deer, leading to the death of Krishna!

Jara killing Krishna (courtesy Wikipedia)

Doesn't this also depict the declining standards of morals? What was unfair during Ram's times and allowed to avenge later, is missing during Krishna's times?

 

Short Story

Two of my short stories have been published on www.Litizen.com

Both of them are in less than 100 words -

"A New Beginning"

http://www.litizen.com/StoryReading.aspx?StoryId=344

"The End"

http://www.litizen.com/StoryReading.aspx?StoryId=345

Did Sita err?

Recently Kailash Vijayvargiya, a BJP Minister from Madhya Pradesh, India, has said that if the women of India breach the lines of morality, they will be punished, just like Sita (http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-01-05/india/36161573_1_kailash-vijayvargiya-babulal-gaur-maryada). While the statement is highly regressive and offensive, what is important is that it did not quite stir a hornets’ nest, except for some condemnation in the social media and a few hours wasted on the visual media.

Does this reveal a passive acknowledgement of such mindset?

This leads me to the question – did Sita err?

In Ramayana, when Sita sends Lakshman to help Rama during their exile in the jungles, Lakshman is supposed to have drawn a line (of morality) asking Sita not to breach it under any circumstances. When Ravan is supposed to have come in the guise of an ascetic asking for alms, he provoked Sita to come out and give him the arms, as he was unable to cross the zone too. According to a poetic version of this episode from the Bengali poem “Meghnadbadh Kabya” (slaying of Meghnad) written by Michael Madhusudan Dutt, Ravan is supposed to have told Sita – “Give me alms, or say you will not, so that I may go elsewhere. Are you unwilling to serve a guest today, O daughter of Janak? Do you want to blacken the house of the Raghu’s with the scandal of this, Married into it though you are?...)*

If we go with the above or any version, Ravan, in the guise of an ascetic is supposed to have threatened Sita with dire consequences for denying alms to an ascetic. So what choice did Sita have?

If Sita declined to step out and give alms to the ascetic as was the norm of the day, she would insult her illustrious in-laws, the clan of the Raghu’s who were known for being the upholders of morals and principles. She would have further maligned the family of her father, King Janak for poor upbringing which had not taught its daughters to serve ascetics. Wasn’t Sita simply following the rules set by the patriarchal norms of the then society? Just how did she breach the moral limits (so regressively known as Lakshman rekha)? Was Sita left with any choice, but to do what seemed to be the need of the hour?

This was a peculiar predicament for Sita. If she agreed with the moral code of her in-laws, then she could have harmed the established norms of the society, and if she catered to the societal norms, then she would have broken the moral code of her in-laws. At the end of the day, Sita was in such a tragic state, because she decided to follow her husband, kidnapped by a King, because her brother-in-law severed the nose of a jungle woman, and later asked to prove her chastity, by her husband. In all the cases, she had to suffer the acts of men. In spite of her unflinching loyalty and dedication, she is misunderstood, punished and banished, without ever given a chance to explain.

Sita's agni-pariksha

Sita endured it, for she had no choice as the moral-brigade of the times had enforced their rules. In her case, it was just not the King who questioned her but even a lowly born mortal (read ‘man’) questioned her morality. She was punished time and again for this single act of hers in many ways than one. But can the same norms be seen as an acceptable code of conduct today? Can stepping out at 9.30pm with a male companion be seen as a breach of morality and thus be punished and that too in such a brutal manner? Should women of today, (and I am not referring just to the 10-20% of the educated city-bred working women) live by the norms of the Puranic times? Should the modern woman, suffer what is better known as the Sita Syndrome? Also, just who are these self-appointed upholders of the medieval morality and what is their authority?

This is not just a feminine issue; it is a matter of civilisation. We cannot have predators roaming around with naked lust, and hide our women from their bloodthirsty eyes. We need to eliminate the predators themselves and let our women roam around freely in this country. We also need to vehemently shut the mouths of all the incorrect utterances of the fossilised moral brigade (be they the politicians or religious heads) and ensure that they simply do not exist. It is they who need to be put on leash, not our women.

Friends and readers of this Blog raise your voice and object to the abject utterances!

*Translated in English by William Radice, Penguin Edition