BT Song 61
On 18-09-1993 at Gonad, by night 2.00 am I suffered due to much stomach pain. Even I began to sweat due to extreme pain and I almost fainted. There was none near me. I suffered that time. Next day morning I also suffered due to much pain. Then in the morning devotion I wrote this song.
18-09-1993 (கோண்டா) அன்று இரவு இரண்டு மணிக்கு மீண்டும் கடுமையான வயிற்று வலி ஏற்பட்டது. வலியின் காரணமாக வியர்க்க ஆரம்ப்பித்து மயக்கம் வந்தது. அருகில் யாரும் இல்லாததால் மிகவும் கஷ்டப்பட்டேன். மறுநாள் காலை தொடர்ந்து வயிற்று வலியால் கஷ்டப்பட்டபோது, காலை தியானத்தில் இப்பாடலை எழுதினேன்:
61. ஓர் புலம்பல்
ஏன் என்று கேட்கவில்லை ஐயா
என்வாழ்வில் இத்துன்பம் ஏன் வைத்தாய் என்று?
உன்சித்தம் ஒன்றே வாழ்வில் நிறைவேற
ஒப்புவித்தேன் அன்றே உன் கையில் நிறைவாக
ஆனாலும் துன்பம் மிகவாகும் போது
என்செய்வேன் உன்னிடம் புலம்புதல் அல்லாது?
முணுமுணுக்க வில்லை முரண்பட்டே நானும்
முனகுகிறேன் இவ்வலி தாக்கிடும் போதும்
அறிந்தவன் நீயே அத்துன்பம் தானும்
அதனாலே வந்தேன் சிறுபிள்ளை நானும்!
மடிமீது தலை வைத்து தலை கோதி மெல்ல
“மகனே” எனக்கூறி ஆறுதல் சொல்ல
தாயின்றி இங்கு தனிமையில் உள்ள
சேய்க்கு நீயன்றி யாருளார் சொல்ல?
18-09-1993 Gonad
61. A Lament
I never questioned you O Lord
Why did you allow such suffering in my life?
I surrendered myself totally at your hand
For you to do your will in my life.
But when the suffering is unbearable
What else can I do except to murmur unto you?
I am not murmuring out of frustration
But I groan as this pain attacks me much.
As you too know such pain
I came unto you your little one
By keeping my head on the lap
By calling me ‘my dear child’ to give comfort
Who else is here for this baby
Who lives here alone without its mother?
18-09-1993 at Gonad
Suffering is a reality and however one wishes to philosophy it. When we face suffering that too because of physical pain, all kinds of philosophy come to an end there. That time longing for human touch and the care of others is the real need. In my life as a single person, as I choose to remain recluse, I paid a heavy price when I underwent physical suffering without anyone around me to take care of me. Though God helped me to manage and sent the needed help in time, yet the ‘loneliness’ that I experienced those times are unbearable. However, I invented my own way to overcome it.
One time here at Mathigiri, when I got a severe stomach ache at 2.00 am, I cannot call anyone. Then I lay down and began to concentrate on the pain. I began to trace its origin in my stomach and travel along with it wherever it moved in my stomach. This gave me some interest. Instead of allowing the pain to trouble me I began to enjoy it. But I must consciously focus my attention more on its intensity and movement than on my pain. In the same way when I burnt my fingers, I began to enjoy the pain rather than allow it to trouble me. Of course, every time it was not possible and I don’t know what I would do if I got hurt more than what I can bear. Anyhow such re-focusing of pain helped me to overcome my ‘loneliness’ and wait patiently for the help to arrive.
As usual another remedy for me is to pour down that experience through some poem. This is one such occasion. The climax of this song is the last four lines and I cannot convey the original meaning in Tamil in English. I find it strange that most of us cry when we have pain by using the word ‘Amma’ than any other words. Is it a Tamilian culture or common to others too? Because whenever I face some pain, the first thing that comes to my mind is my mother, as she will take care of me more than anyone else. That is what I expressed in the last four lines.
1-7-14
BT Song 62
On 26-10-1993 (Gonda) I had to make some crucial decisions. Several questions also came about my future. But submitting all of them with the Lord, I wrote this song as my prayer:
26-10-1993 (கோண்டா)-அன்று சில முக்கியமான தீர்மானங்கள் எடுக்க வேண்டி இருந்தது. எதிர்காலம் பற்றிய சில கேள்விகளும் தோன்றின. ஆனால் அனைத்தையும் இறைவனிடம் கொண்டு சென்றபோது எழுதிய பாடல்:
62. எது வேண்டும்
இது வேண்டும் அது வேண்டும்
என நிதம் பல வேண்டாமல்
எதை நான் செயவேண்டும்
என உளம் நீ கொண்டாயோ
அதையே நான் செய்ய வேண்டி
அருளை நீ தருவாயே!
62. What is my requirement?
Not asking this need and that
Not praying for them everyday
What you have for me in your heart
For me to do
Help me to accomplish that
Giving by your grace
The following is one of my favourite poems in Thiruvasagam by Manickavasagar.
வேண்டத் தக்க தறிவோய்நீ! வேண்ட முழுதுந் தருவோய்நீ
வேண்டும் அயன் மாற் கரியோய்நீ! வேண்டி என்னைப் பணிகொன்டாய்!
வேண்டிநீ யாதருள் செய்தாய்? யானும் அதுவே வேண்டின் அல்லால்
வேண்டும் பரிசொன் றுண்டென்னில் அதுவும் உன்றன் விருப்பன்றே?–குழைத்த பத்து, 6
–Thou know’st what to DESIRE is meet, –when we DESIRE
Thou’rt He that wholly grants! To Ayan (Brahma) and to Maal {Vishnu}
DESIRING Thee, how hard to reach! Yet me Thou didst
DESIRE, my service claim! DESIRING what didst Thou
Bestow Thy grace? That and naught else do I DESIRE
And if aught else there be that stirs in me DESIRE,
That too, in sooth, is Thy DESIRE,–is it no so?
–The Tiruvacagam, G.U. Pope, London, Oxford University Press, 1900, p. 275
(You know what my requirement is; you will provide all my needs;
You are rare indeed to Brahma and Vishnu; you alone voluntarily called me for your seva; you alone voluntarily gave your grace; I too not only asking that alone, if I need any other things, that I leave to your desire—my free translation)
The peace that occupies our mind once we know for sure that this is God’s will for us, then the intensity of anxiety comes down though not completely disappears.
On several occasions I have stumbled on small areas when I took decisions thinking that it is God’s will. But to my amazement, on certain crucial decisions, I never felt any pressure or too much anxiety and things moved very smoothly. But when I look back, I realize one fact: in taking crucial decisions, I sought the counsel and prayers of my well-wishers. Sometimes I accepted their advice though it went against my desire. Somehow, I felt that it is better to listen to them than making my own decisions as such decisions won’t affect me alone.
I think this is very crucial in our bhakti as a mandali. If I am part of a (physical) mandali, I must surrender some of my personal freedom also, unless it affects my privacy too much.
Let me give one practical example. Kannan often pestered me to get married, even though he knew my final decision on that matter. As he is my best friend, I often took it as a joke and passed some jovial comments about it. When one time he too again insisted how I shouldn’t live ‘alone’ then I said, ‘O.K. Go and talk to Prasad. If he agrees then I will get married.’ So, when Kannan met Prasad, the latter said, ‘What?!? Swamiji getting married? No chance? What will my relatives and friends think about it? They all will laugh at me by saying, “finally your Swamiji also succumbed to the need of another person”! Forget it completely.’
When I met Prasad, he said this to me. I also told him that he is the right person to confront Kannan, that is why I asked him to talk about it to you. After that Kannan never raised that matter again though still, he often teases me (now I know he does this because of jealousy. Kannan, it is too late for both of us).
So, it looks very strange to me that I never pray very intensively for many crucial decisions, when I sought the counsel of others and accepted the collective decision of my well-wishers, whereas on several small issues I must pray a lot as the final responsibility rests with me. This is one strength in our bhakti as a mandali. When we submit to the mandali, we are not surrendering our personal freedom, but allow others to shoulder our responsibility. But any decision that will affect the entire mandali and strain our relationship with others, then submission is better than seeking the will of God through our personal prayers alone.
1-7-14
BT Song 63
63. உள்ளபடி வா
வாழ்கின்றேன் இன்னும் வையகம் தன்னில்
வள்ளலே உந்தன் கிருபையதனால்
வீழ்ந்திட்ட நாட்களை எண்ணியே நின்றால்
வேதனை ஒன்றே மிஞ்சிடும் என்னில்
நொந்து நிற்பதால் பயனேதும் காணேன்
நோக்கினேன் உந்தன் அன்பினை நானும்
“உள்ளபடி வா” என்று உரைத்ததினால்
உருகியே வந்தேன் உன்னடி நானும்
படிந்திட்ட கறைகளோ பலப்பல வாழ்விலே
வழியேதும் காணேன் அவைகளை நீக்க
பரிவாக அன்று நீ சிந்திய குருதி
பரிகாரம் ஆயிற்று என்குறை நீக்க
17-02-1994
63. Come just as you are
I still live on this earth
By your grace alone O Charitable One!
If I think only of my falls
Pain alone will remain at the end
There is no use only in having remorse
And I look unto your love alone
As you said, ‘Come as you are’
I too come unto your feet with a melted heart
The strains in my life are many
I don’t find any means to remove them
The blood which you shed in the past
Become the remedy for me to remove my shortcomings.
17-02-1994
By birth as a Brahmin, this concept of ‘shedding blood’ and I am cleansed by it is an abomination for me in every respect. In fact, it will add more ‘strain’ (கறை) than removing the previous ones. This is one area in which I had to struggle a lot in my bhakti in the Lord. Later my study on Hinduism, particularly related with animal sacrifice, helped me to understand its significance. Yet as a rational person, I still find it a bit out of place in my reasoning.
But my bhakti helps me to resolve several doctrinal issues with which my reason refuses to accept. The first step is to understand the ‘irrationality of the reason itself’. For me reason is a logical conclusion that I can arrive at based on my understanding and acceptance. But it need not be universal. So, for me every ‘reason’ is personal and trying to present a ‘rational’ solution to many experiences in life, particularly related to the esoteric one, is ‘irrational’. Every kind of logical argument can be nullified by counter argument.
To be honest no one can win or present her view on doctrinal areas through logical argument or presentation. Certain things in life begin by faith or trusting the witness of others and then try to reason it out based on personal need and experience, to say in other words, no one can believe any doctrinal issue only after a clear rationalistic understanding about it. Till the end certain doctrinal issues will remain incompatible to reason. But somewhere somehow, we began the journey and during it we accepted the other parts of doctrine which cannot be explained or understood based only on reason. But without accepting them we cannot understand the totality of a particular faith/tradition. And all the areas won’t be appealing to us and will continue to remain a mystery or challenge. But how far they come close to enhance our faith/bhakti will be crucial for us to continue in that pilgrimage. Because ignoring them or explaining them to accommodate our rationalistic point of view will distort the whole truth.
How I reasoned out logically in my life is this: My search for the answer to the question was: ‘why cannot I leave a perfect life even for a single day’. All the other answers that I managed to get through my Hindu tradition gave me the best excuses. They never created any guilty conscience, even any remorse to accept my personal responsibility. So, they never satisfied me. And then my search for a guru to help me ended up in Mukti Nath. And my journey with Him and in Him never began with a clear understanding or acceptance of various doctrines related to His life and mission. It began once it helped me to locate my problem.
Once my problem is located then I realise that I must begin by working back to understand not only His teaching but also His life. There is no point of ‘selectively’ taking some of His teachings which appeals to my reason and reject others. In fact, those teachings, according to me become mere babbling that anyone could utter, if separated from His life and Seva. They become meaningful only if I accept, if not understand the very life through which those teachings came in its totality with all its doctrinal implications.
Our Lord’s death on the Cross and by shedding His blood He cleanses me, though not logically appealing to me, yet that is how His life was presented, out of which His teachings were collected by His immediate disciples and early bhaktas. In fact, His death on the cross (and all other things that followed) forced them to understand and promote His LIFE AND TEACHING.1 If I cannot accept His death and the doctrine related to it, then I must reject His teaching as well the way that teaching located my problem. I cannot selectively accept the way it diagnosed my problem and then work out my own solution to solve it.
I must accept the treatment of a doctor who successfully diagnosed my problem. Even if I don’t trust her completely, yet unless I begin the treatment I cannot further proceed. I can seek a second opinion from some other doctor, yet when other doctors failed to diagnose my disease, if a particular doctor located it, then I have no other option but to continue the treatment from her. This illustration cannot be stretched beyond this. This is another example to prove my point that by mere argument we cannot prove a point as it will be nullified by counter arguments. Here the counter argument could be, ‘well one (general physician) diagnosed the disease but she must refer you to a specialist for further treatment and she cannot insist on doing the complete treatment. In the same way Mukti Veda could have diagnosed your problem but you can also get the solution from your (Hindu) tradition where all kinds of solutions are available addressing to the need of every individual based on her need, birth, character, temperament etc. than insisting that Mukti Veda or Mukti Nath alone could solve your problem.’ Then my counter response would be, ‘well my search for a guru to find out my problem is ended up in Him. So let me give Him a chance to further guide me. And if He fails, then I can always return to my old search.’
(When yesterday evening I went for my walk, I was further thought about my imagined dialogue with an orthodox Hindu about debating my bhakti in Mukti Nath)
An afterthought:
Purvapakshin: But how long will it continue?
DB: Till the end of my life. Then if I attain Mukti according to my bhakti in the Lord, then I will gain. If not, according to our Hindu belief, I will take another birth based on my karmas to work out my own salvation. In both ways I am in an advantageous position, which I don’t want to give up. So according to your own argument, in this birth according to my need, character, and temperament and even because of my past karmas, it is written that I should follow Mukti Nath. And no one should put a stumbling blog in that path. Even if others persuade me to keep my goal ahead of me, I must press forward not minding others comments, because as our struti says, ‘aham atma balahinene na labyase’ (a weak person cannot attain that atman). So, I should not allow anyone to weaken me.
Once Mukti Veda diagnosed my problem, then with some trust I began to follow the Lord. Of course, all the doctrinal issues related to His life, particularly about His atonement never appealed to my reason based on logic, but it met the need for my inner need and longing of my atman. Of course, Swami Vivekananda can rebuke me by saying, ‘”it is a sin to call man as a sinner” and any need for a bloodletting atonement.’ And Vedanta can appeal to my logically pushing reason that ‘aham brahmasmi’ (I am brahman).
The interesting thing for me is that such teachings of Neo-Vedanta and Vedanta appeal to my reason, yet the way they try to explain away my inner struggle as mere ‘avidya’ (ignorance) or ‘maya’ looks very illogical. Reality always challenges idealism, though it may not undermine it. Their statements appeal to my reason (viz., I am not a sinner and the very Being of the Brahman) but their solution looks illogical and the treatment they prescribe to remove that ‘avidya’ looks impractical:
—it is through knowledge first, based on a correct understanding of sruti, but not mere intellectual understanding of it. That knowledge goes beyond the sruti. However, it is not possible for all. Only a twice born person can study it. But all are not qualified, except the twice born (dviji). Even among them, unless one becomes a sannyasi, that Mukti is not possible. And all cannot become a sannyasi and only a Brahmin among the twice born is qualified for it (nivarti marga). And others have to work out slowly through various births (pravarti marga). And to help them all kinds of other means (vyavaharika) thorough bhakti, ritual, etc. are prescribed as no one will be left out completely. And both these two ways are within the reach of everyone and no outside help is required for it—like someone doing atonement for us.
Here is both a reasonable approach and illogical inconsistency. However, it is beyond the scope to discuss them here in detail. Similar reasonable approach and illogical inconsistency is also in Mukti Veda (predestination viz., God chose some for Mukti and others for hell; a theory of linear history [it started sometime in the past and will end up sometime in future, etc.]). Neither my reason nor my longing can bridge the gap properly; I begin from where my longing is first addressed. Then I try my best to understand through reason all the doctrines that related to the issue with which I struggled. All do not make sense. At the same time, I don’t want to explain away hair-splitting exegesis or dilute them by making them universally disconnected from their contexts. (See notes 1) My simple solution to such contradiction is: once I began to live as per the level of my understanding and the way the longing of my atman is addressed, then either God will reveal more about other areas in which I am not clear or I myself through proper study will try to understand them in their total context.
Here I have to stop, because further I write it will confuse me more than anyone else—as I don’t know how to present my thoughts in English. I know this sharing will raise more questions which need to be addressed in a systematic way for which I am not qualified.
Well, by sharing this, I raise more questions than presenting any solutions to all Mukti Vedic doctrines and all the contradictions that reason refuse to accept.
One encouraging thing in our bhakti is that we can go to the Lord ‘just as we are’. These days in Podhigai TV channel (Tamil) morning 6.45 to 7.00 Sri M. V. Ananda Padbanacharayar presents a beautiful discourse on the greatness of acharya (of Sri Vaishnava Sampradaya ‘RAMANUJA VAIBHAVAM’). And this morning (9-7-2014) he said, that as people will afraid to go God who carries some ‘astra’ (weapon) by the fear of punishment because of their inner nature (character, sin etc.) having pity on them, giving up the ‘astra’ the very God took the avatara as acharyas (teacher, guru) with ‘sastra’ (scriptures) to teach us. That is why He has to take the avatara as a human being to communicate to us (as Krishna is called ‘Gitachariyan’ gita = acharya). So acharya is God Himself and HE is even greater than God. So, we can go to His presence with our doubts and questions without any fear. (These are not his exact words but my summary of his 15 minutes talk)
It is very difficult to live with Mukti Nath as His demands go beyond Ten Commandments. In one way it is easy to please the God of Pura Veda. However thankfully He came as a Human being to teach us knowing our limitations and needs. So, we can go ‘just as we are’ to Him. The one consolation that I always have in Him is that He is ready to accept my ‘weakness’ but not ‘excuses’. And sometimes I find it comfortable for me to become ‘weak’ so that I need not even gain strength to offer any excuses.
The following story may not be relevant here, but I would like to share. I very vaguely remember it as I read several years before:
One saint everyday walked along with the Lord on the beach by talking with Him. So, there will always be four footsteps on the sand. One day after a long walk, when he looked back, to his surprise he saw only two footsteps. With much disturbance He asked the Lord why He suddenly deserted him and went away. For this the Lord said, ‘my dear son. You become too weak in your mind and spirit. Then I have to carry you in my arms. And the two footsteps that you see are not yours but mine’
9-7-14
1.. This is from my book review on Chaturvedi Badrinath’s two books:
Dharma, India, and the World Order. Edinburgh, Scotland: Saint Andrew Press and Bonn, Germany: Pahl-Rugenstein Verlag 1993 and Finding Jesus in Dharma: Christianity in India. Delhi: 2000, ISPCK. [I this review is not posted in my blog. And those who are interested I can send. —db]
Second, Badrinath ends by giving a picture of Jesus that does not at all ring true. Opposing traditional views of Jesus he says, “the problem was that whereas Jesus was talking symbolically, those who heard him, including his disciples, understood him literally, and therefore did not understand him at all.” [2000: 184] But if Jesus’ disciples understood him wrongly, surely, we should not claim that we can understand Him rightly. Promoting a cosmic Christ in opposition to the personal understanding of the disciples of Jesus based on their experience is wrong. For them He Himself was that Great Reality-the very God in flesh in His PERSON. Definitely there was a progressive understanding about this among His disciples, which was completed only after his crucifixion and resurrection. It is true that “what Jesus was saying, was that it is truth and love, and not the satisfaction of physical appetites alone, that make man fully human. What he was saying, was that it is love, and not the laws, that has the redeeming power.” [2000: 184-5] But it is a wrong perception to say that, “seen in this light, neither his crucifixion nor his resurrection is to be understood in its gross physical sense, although that is how they mostly have been understood.” [185] Because at least for the first disciples of Jesus all that happened in a gross physical sense in the life of Jesus, which has become a historical event for us now, is not a “mere record of events” [166] but also the meaning of those events, the interpretation the disciples of Jesus taught to others who confirmed that meaning in their own experience. The criteria for history is not just an event, but the interpretation of that event by those who have direct encountered with it. It is not that “Christianity in history” with its all varieties of beliefs that will help us to understand Jesus Christ as a PERSON, but the relationship which we have with Him because of our faith; faith both as a gift of God and our conscience response to that gift.
BT Song 64
64. அருளுக்குக் குறைவில்லை
வேதாந்தம் சித்தாந்தம்
விளங்காத தத்துவம்
உருவாக்க முடியாத
உள்ளான ஒளியை
அருளான உன்வார்த்தை
ஒன்றாலே உள்ளத்தில்
நிறைவாக உருவாக்கி
நிலைபெறச் செய்தாய்
தவறாக வழிமாறி
தடுமாறும் போது
தத்துவம் ஏதுமே
உதவாத போது
உன்னாவி ஒன்றாலே
உண்மையை விளக்கி
உன்னடி பின்செல்ல
உன்னருள் தந்தாய்
எதனாலே என் மீது
இத்தனை பரிவு
ஏதுதான் நீகண்டாய்
என்னிலே நிறைவு
நோக்கினால் என்னில்
குறையன்றி வேறில்லை
ஆயினும் அவைநீக்க
அருளுக்கும் குறைவில்லை
64 Grace is not lacking
The inner light
Which cannot be produced
By Vedanta and other
Confusing Siddhantas
You created in its Fullness
And made it dwell in my heart
Only through your grace
And noble Words.
When we stumble in life
And gone astray
Where philosophies
Won’t be any more use
Through your Spirit
Explaining the Truth
You gave your grace
To follow you.
Why this much
Pity on me
What you found in me
Any good quality?
If you look into me
There nothing but shortcomings
Yet to remove them
The grace is not lacking.
When one goes astray, she might try to philosophy it by giving various excuses and reasons like, ‘no one is perfect, this is Kali age, it is my bad time, karma, sin etc.’ But a person who is conscious about her own shortcomings will never try to philosophy such acts. And this is common when I don’t know the Lord, as my worldview allowed such excuses easily without accepting personal responsibility quickly. But the first thing in our bhakti is to shed more light on our shortcomings than giving any other reason. The inner voice of the Holy Spirit which always warns us about any wrongdoing is a great asset for us in the Lord.
The ‘Jyothi’ which I often hear from Hindus which dwells in our heart is the inner voice of the Holy Spirit silently whispering within us. Don’t ‘put out’ the Holy Spirit within you (1 Thes. 5:19) is a serious warning given by Sevanand in this regard which we need to keep always in our mind. Though nothing can separate us from the Love of the Lord, yet by our own free will we can refuse to hear that ‘whisper’ of the Holy Spirit in our conscience, however God never withdrew His grace.
Leave a Reply