Faith and Festivals

Faith and Festival

The greatest challenge for a Hindu bhakta of the Lord is what to do with the religious festivals that happen in her family. Once a Hindu becomes a “Christian” and joins any denominational church she can keep away from all such Hindu festivals. But for us, who remain a part of our family and community while keeping our bhakti in the Lord, it remains a challenge. The easy solution given by the Christian mentors to the “converts” is to keep away from such festivals as much as possible. Or if a convert is compelled to participate in a festival, then the Christians advise them to at least keep away from the rituals and eating prasad. But this brings more tension in the mind of a Hindu bhakta as she cannot selectively participate in some parts of the festival and avoid the rest. This is because, like every other aspect of society in India, life is not divided in water tight compartments. In any festival or function the cultural, social and religious (ritual) events overlap each other; and it is not easy to mark which are which. Particularly no outsider to a family and community can decide on it for the bhakta. In any case, keeping away from those festivals can never be an option. As I often said, your absence will be more obvious than your presence. If you participate you will be one among the crowd and others are not going to be worried or observe what you keep and what you avoid. In addition, festivals are not simply mundane events to the Hindu bhakta. Rather, festivals help the individual and community break from the monotonous routine of life. As such, a Hindu bhakta, taking a higher spiritual ground cannot avoid it, as if she has transcended to the need of any mundane needs.

When this question was asked to me by so many Hindu bhaktas, I told them that they are in the same situation as that of Naaman. And the best option for them is to participate actively and wholeheartedly rather than just choose some events and try to avoid the rest. There is no point in trying to do this. As a Tamil proverb says, “once you get wet (in the rain) what is the need of covering only the head?” (முழுக்க நனைஞ்ச பிறகு முக்காடு எதற்கு). Practically speaking, since the rituals in a function happen quickly one after the other, a bhakta cannot go in front for one and come back for another, disturbing others as well herself. Just participate as a normal member of your own family and enjoy the function and festival rather than living with any guilty conscience. To the question of taking part in certain rituals like arati and eating prasad, already I have shared my views in other places, which I need not repeat here. If your conscience is clear and if your bhakti is strong in the Lord, mere outward participation won’t “separate you from the love of god”. From your family’s and community members’ perspective you are not compromising with your bhakti or accepting their faith when you participate in rituals and take prasad. Rather it symbolizes your unity with the family and community. If a bhakta desires to take a “stand for the Lord”, they should not do it by refusing to participate in rituals and functions but instead demonstrate it in one’s day-to-day living. Those who insist that one should take a “stand for the Lord” by not participating in festivals and family functions are like those “blind guides” who the Lord said would “strain out a gnat but swallow a camel” (Mt. 23:24).

Regarding Christian festivals, we’ve never celebrated any “Christian festival” in our life. Instead, we celebrate all our Indian (Hindu) festivals keeping the Lord in our atman.

Diwali is our Muktinath Jayanti [celebrating the Incarnation of the Lord]. We celebrate Pongal [a festival specific to Tamil Nadu] as a harvest festival in the traditional way. This harvest festival is celebrated at the same time in other parts of India in different names: Bihu (or Bigu) in Assam, Lodi in Punjab, and (Mahara) Sankranti in most of the parts. In the past, we organized community pongal in our ashram where we invited the local people. One time, even a few Muslims participated.

One time a bhakta in West Bengal asked me how to celebrate Durga Puja as it is a major religious and social festival. He said that as a bhakta of the Lord he cannot do puja to Durga. At the same time, as all his neighbours are celebrating in a grand way, he must do something at his home or his children and other Hindu relatives will miss it. I suggested doing a three day puja on the 8th, 9th and 10th day. In general, these are the main days when Sarasvati, Lakshmi, and Durga are celebrated. Then I asked him to celebrate each day focusing on the Trinity—Father, Son and the Holy Spirit. I asked him to select the relevant verses to read in the evening puja and gather his children and other family members and celebrate using all the traditional methods.  But it left to individual bhakta how to do each and every festival according to his/her local need and context.

Similarly, we celebrate Raki (Raksha Bandhan) and Holi. Holi comes close to Easter. Holi is the festival of reconciliation and I asked the North Indian bhaktas to celebrate keeping the same theme as God reconciling humanity with him. But I tell the Hindu bhaktas never to celebrate any Christian festival, particularly Christmas, as it will send the wrong message to other family members and relatives.

Finally, I want to insist on one point. By celebrating all our Hindu festivals, we are not ‘redeeming’ them for the Lord, and they are not so-called ‘Functional Substitute’ (a famous term used in missiology). We need not ‘redeem’ anything in our culture for the Lord, as it already belongs to us.

Db

12-1-19. Mathigiri.

It is worth reading what Kenneth Baily says about the Naaman incident. I give the full text to understand the context:

According to her worldview, {I King 17:1-16} each god’s power was limited to his territory. Yahweh, of the land of Israel, could only help those who lived in Israel. Sidon was Baal’s country, and only Baal had power there. The widow naturally assumed that the God of Israel was powerless in her district. Jonah thought he could escape Yahweh by escaping the land of Israel on a ship (Jon 1:3). Naaman, the visiting general from Damascus, took soil from Israel with him on his homeward journey so that he could pray to Israel’s God while living in Damascus. Obviously, if each god held sway only over a certain territory, Naaman did not expect the God of Israel to hear him unless he stood on at least some soil from the land of Israel! He solved his problem by taking the necessary soil from Israel with him to Damascus (2 Kings 5:17)…. — Kenneth E. Bailey, Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes: Cultural Studies in the Gospels, Illinois, IVP Academic, 2008, p. 164

It is interesting to note that Elisha did not give Naaman any teaching on theology but, despite Naaman’s limited understanding of God, clearly understood his worldview and never objected to his act of taking the soil or condemned it as blind faith. He simply said “Go in PEACE”.

I originally wrote the above to someone for their private needs, after which he responded, ‘I’m not so clear on the last sentence of the article: ‘We need not “redeem” anything in our culture for the Lord as it already belongs to us.’ Someone might ask, can’t we glorify the Lord through good things in our culture? And in that sense we also ‘redeem’ it?”

S. B.

30-1-19. Mathigiri.

In response I wrote the following:

In general many evangelicals when using some Indian symbols or festivals in the name of “contextualization” say that they are “redeeming” them for the Lord. But for me, the question is, “redeeming from whom or what”? Because most of the Christians think that everything in Hinduism is from the devil. And when they are forced to use certain Indian symbols and rituals/functions they think that they are compromising their faith in the Lord as it will create a “syncretistic” faith. To avoid any such compromise or syncretism now they use the term “redeeming” them for the Lord viz., redeem those symbols and functions from the devil to use for the glory of the lord.

Regarding the question of redemption about which there are different views,¹ God in Muktinath redeemed us from the devil by paying the ransom to him. But many don’t agree with it and instead claim that the Lord never paid any ransom to the devil but rather appeased the righteous indignation of God by redeeming us from the sinful nature to make us the children of God. I too believe that the Lord never paid any ransom to the devil. Keeping this technical term in mind, the evangelicals say that they are redeeming certain aspects of Indian (or Hindu) civilization for the Lord as if all those aspects belong to a “religion” which is controlled by the devil. As a digression, I have to point out that in the past both the British Government and several missionaries assigned everything in Hinduism to the religious sphere.² Present day Christians do not understand this and continue the same legacy in their attitude towards Hindu functions and symbols.

For me every good thing in every culture and society is a gift from God—though some of the good things in a given society may look evil to outsiders. So good or bad should be decided by the natives and not outsiders. Even those religious aspects in Hinduism related with rituals have cultural and social values that are not strictly related to the various deities of Hinduism.

Take for example using the “manglaya sutra” (known as thali in Tamil) which is not a pan-Indian symbol which the bridegroom ties to the bride in marriage symbolizing the culmination of marriage. Most of the early Christians refused to include that ceremony in their “Christian wedding”. But later, when they realized that they cannot easily throw away the “sentiment” attached with “mangalya”, with the help of the missiological technical term “functional substitute” used a “Christian thali” of the Cross to replace the traditional thali (in gold which will have the symbol of the family sectarian mark or some other symbol related to that particular family).³ Though I accept their need of it, considering the original background of cross where criminals were crucified and later become the symbol of “loving sacrifice” by the Lord, in principle it won’t be considered as an “auspicious symbol” to be used in a wedding. But as a joke I say that by wearing the “Cross as thali”, the bride communicates her “loving sacrifice” of her life for her husband and his family in the marriage.

Keeping all this in mind, I say that as every good aspect in our culture is from God, we need not “redeem” any aspect in our Indian (Hindu) culture as if they belong to the devil. Even for those few aspects related to ritual we need not even introduce any so-called “functional substitute”. For example, in a marriage where the boy or girl is compelled to use the “thali” with a sectarian mark, keeping the “Naaman” formula, we need not object to it and fight with their family members to replace it with some other symbol. For example, in a Sri Vaishnavite family they may have a thali with their sectarian mark of tripundra (Namama in Tamil). If a girl or boy is compelled to use it in the wedding, she or he should go along with the family. This is not even any concession shown to the family by a Hindu bhakta of the Lord. She or he accepts the legitimate right of their parents to perform the wedding of their children in their traditional manner. Those who want to become “convert” and join the denomination Christian church and community can do whatever they want. I am not talking about them. I only address every Hindu bhakta of the Lord. I can show several case studies in which such Hindu symbols were at first rejected and the people later had to change and accommodate the sentiment⁴ of the other family members.⁴ This happened recently. When a heavy duty Pentecostal girl’s marriage was arranged with a Hindu boy, her church refused to accommodate any kind of Hindu symbols or ritual in the marriage and it was conducted in a typical Pentecostal type marriage—with white sari, without our any ornament, flower etc. for the girl, which symbolizes “widowhood” in Hindu world view. (But for the Pentecostals “no ornament and flower” is doctrine and “white” is the symbol of “purity”).

But the parents of the boy not only refused to attend the marriage but insisted that unless the girl wears their family “thali”, they won’t receive the boy and the girl in their home. Finally their marriage was arranged again in a Hindu temple (Mariyamman) not only with a “Hindu thalli” but also with flowers and ornaments, which are anathema to the Pentecostals. [I have the photo of this marriage with me, but cannot share it as I was requested not to share it with others]. In another family, after several years of marriage and having two children, in order to accommodate the sentiment of her husband’s family, the sensible Hindu bhakta removed her “Cross thali” and changed to the family thali given by her mother-in-law. Interestingly in this case not only are the couple Hindu bhaktas of the Lord, but even the mother-in-law had become a bhakta of the Lord. But she was still happy when her daughter-in-law came forward to change “the Christian thali” to a “Hindu thali” to accommodate the sentiment of the wider family members.

That is why I say that we need not “redeem” anything which already belongs to us. Even those aspects which we think are not compatible with our bhakti in the Lord should be replaced after serious study, research and consideration and not based on any misguided evangelical zeal in the name of taking a stand for the Lord. For me any function in the family or community is not the only place for us to take a stand for the Lord. That stand should be taken in our everyday life when we rub shoulders with others.

Finally, several people are not agreeing with me and say that we should take a stand for the Lord by refusing to oblige to family pressure. When this discussion came in one place, I pointed out that the same “converts” are not ready to take a “stand for the Lord” when it comes to sharing the family property and name. They know that their family property, according to their parents, is a blessing and a gift from the family deity. But when it comes to dividing the property the same “converts” throw away the stand that s/he takes for the Lord and are even ready to fight for their share of it. Similarly their family titles as Banerji, Nair, Naidu, Yadav, Misra, Pande, etc. are Hindu titles, but even after the conversion they want to keep the name to parade their caste identity. For them taking a “stand for the Lord” is very selective and not spread over all areas of their life. Keeping this in mind they have no right to question our “Naaman formula” of not disturbing the social fabric in the name of faith.

I know so many points that need to be elaborated and discussed properly.  Each article that I write like this has its own limited context.  I have written several similar articles on the same subject.  All of them should be compiled as one and should be presented topic by topic.  But that is not my job as I am not a good editor.  For example: Festival and bhakti; Holi question, Honoring parents, Identity question; Idol worship; My bhakti Theology [two parts]; Prasad Problem; Where to Draw the Line, Again Idol, No Lakshman Reka etc. are some that come to my mind.  Kindly keep this in mind, in case you by mistake or accidently read this article.

31-1-19.  Mathigiri.

NOTES

1. Indeed, while the conviction of redemption through Christ has always been the motive force of Christian faith, no final and universally accepted definition of the manner of its achievement has been formulated to this [The Sub-Apostolic Age ] day…— J.N.D. Kelly, EARLY CHRISTIAN DOCTRINES, Second Edition, 1960; Harper & Row, Pub. New York, p.163

…First, there was the so-called “physical” or “mystical” theory which linked redemption with the incarnation. According to this, human nature was sanctified, transformed and elevated by the very act of Christ’s becoming man…. Secondly, there was the explanation of the redemption in terms of a ransom offered to, or a forfeit imposed on, the Devil ….(p.375) Thirdly, there was the theory, often designated “realist”, which directed attention to the Saviour’s sufferings. Making more of sin and the punishment due for it than of its tragic legacy, this placed the cross in the foreground, and pictured Christ as substituting Himself for sinful men, shouldering the penalty which justice required them to pay, and reconciling them to God by His sacrificial death.
…They were all of them attempts to elucidate the same great truth from different angles; their superficial divergences are often due to the different Biblical images from which they started, and there is no logical reason why, carefully stated, they should not be regarded as complementary…—ibid., pp.375-76

2. The attempt by British sources to impart a religious colour to Thugee is explained by Peter van der Veer as follows: “Before the British succeeded in placing all criminality in India under the sign of “caste”, “tribe”, and “race” in the second half of the nineteenth century, they still attributed it to religion.”{ Veer, Peter van der. Imperial Encounters: Religion and Modernity in India and Britain. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2001, p.p. 151-52}— Sharma, Arvind. The Ruler”s Gaze: A study of British Rule over India from a Saidian Perspective, Noida, HarperCollins Publishers, 2017, p. 105

3. Even the Vedic mantra used in marriage has nothing to do with any deity but secular in nature.

Mangalyam tandunaane
Mamajeevana hetunaa
Kande badmaami suupake
Tvama jeeva sarads-satam

Oh auspicious woman, giving the assurance that the family life which I begin today with you should be a good one, I tied this mangalyam (wedding chain) in your neck.
Becoming my life partner (family partner), sharing in my joy and sorrow, let you live one hundred years with all kinds of prosperity.
(a free translation by me).

[the highlight is “Mamajeevana hetunaa” =mama=my; jeevana=life, hetunaa=welfare, viz. for the welfare of my life. As women are not entitled to read Veda or chant Vedic mantras, above all no ritual is performed by her in a marriage, we can understand the context of this mantra as “husband oriented”. As she is “given” by her father (a man) to her husband (a man), naturally it will be man oriented ritual.]

மாங்கல்யம் தந்துனானே
மமஜீவன ஹேதுநா
கண்டே பத்நாமி ஸூபகே
த்வம ஜீவ சரதஸ்சதம்!!

“மங்கலமான பெண்ணே! உன்னோடு இன்று நான் துவங்கும் இல்லறவாழ்வு நல்லமுறையில் இருக்க வேண்டும் என்று உறுதியளித்து, இந்த திருமாங்கல்யத்தை உன் கழுத்தில் அணிவிக்கிறேன். என் இல்லத்துணைவியாக, என் சுக துக்கங்களில் பங்கேற்று, நிறைந்த யோகத்துடன் நீ நூறாண்டு காலம் வாழ்வாயாக.”–தின மலர். ஆன்மிக மலர். அக்டோபர், 23, 2010, ப. 3

4. Thali sentiment is great in South India, particularly in Tamilnadu. Several films were made on this sentiment. When I was teaching a group of full-time workers on contextualization and the question of keeping ‘pottu’ (bindi) came up, I presented my view of allowing it for women. But almost all the participants, including women, opposed it by saying that they will never allow it. Some of the couples who participated in that class were Hindu converts and their wives, pointing to their foreheads, said that they removed it for the sake of the Lord. Then with a smile I said, “how about the thali which was tied by your husband when you both were Hindus? Why are you still keeping it even with the old thali with the sectarian mark of the symbol of your family deity? Are you ready to remove and replace it with a ‘Christian thali of Cross’? Then all of them literally stood on their legs and even some husbands came towards me shouting, “how dare you ask our wives to become widows?” Then they went and complained to the Administrator, saying that I told their wives to become widows. Even now several Hindu converts will easily remove their pottu but never their thali which was tied by their husband. Such was the deep-seated sentiment towards it by Tamil women.