Down with birthdays!
(Pragyata Magazine, 7 August 2020)
Last year, 2019, in a
neighbouring civilization called the Year of the Pig, coincidentally on Autumn
Equinox, there was a potentially important conference in Delhi Aerocity. Though
tailor-made for welcoming foreigners arriving at the airport, I was the only
real foreigner there: both foreign national and foreign resident. Yet, in the
introductory proceedings, the organizers highlighted that I had recently turned
60. Since 60 = 5 x 12, a full Chinese 12-year Zodiac had revolved once more
since my birth, which means I am a Pig myself. That must explain my fondness
for Varaha, Vishnu’s Boar incarnation who saves the Earth goddess from the deep,
and who spites pig-haters by showing how even a pig can be God. Pig and proud
to be one!
Still, I had mixed
feelings about this attention to my birthday. True, I have to plead guilty:
they had asked me beforehand, and I had cursorily agreed, knowing Hindus’
penchant for celebrating. Earlier that year, I had attended a conference where
invited speakers had been asked to shorten and even further shorten their
prepared speeches to make room for more pomp and ceremony – and the audience
loved it. That was an astrology conference which I only attended because a
Serbo-Belgian friend of mine was being honoured, and for that kind of occasion
and audience, all this empty glitter was what you might expect.
But this conference was
different. It focused on the legal discriminations against Hinduism, a very
grim reality about which six years of Narendra Modi’s rule hasn’t done anything
(though indirectly, the purely secular reform of abolishing the special status
of Jammu & Kashmir has remedied a de facto source of injustice to
the Hindus). This birthday stuff seemed to me, an impatient Westerner,
inappropriately frivolous for such a potentially consequential work meeting.
(It was not even the
only off-topic venture. The organizers also honoured Alok Kumar, advocate and
VHP leader. I was very happy to see him back: in the 1990s I had met him
several times when he fought court cases for Ram Swarup and Sita Ram Goel,
always victorious. Now this, even more than his side career as a VHP
office-bearer, made him truly deserving of being honoured. Only, this was not
the right occasion: it gave a handle to the Mendacious Media to misrepresent
this independent pan-Hindu initiative as a VHP affair. And yes, the next day
the Times of India reported the conference highlighting its VHP
dimension but obscuring its theme, as it did not want the fact of anti-Hindu
discrimination to enter its readers’ consciousness.)
I have never been into
birthday celebrations. In Belgium, my own birthday fell in the summer holidays,
so I didn’t have my schoolmates etc. around me to do any celebrating, and I
noticed my parents not paying any attention to it either. When I had become a
father myself, I noticed my mother, the kids’ grandmother, frowning on all the
time and money spent by the new generation on such a silly mundane occasion.
In real Roman Catholic
tradition, it was not the birthday that was celebrated, but the “name day”. All
Catholic children were named after a saint, and they celebrated the day
allotted to that saint in the Saints’ Calendar. Good for me, as there were
several saints called Koenraad. To limit myself to an example known in India:
all boys named Valentine were expected to celebrate 14 February. The fact that
birthdays had entered our consciousness at all was a symptom of the march of
secularization. (But this had already been going on for long enough to produce
a few good Dutch birthday carols, far better than the American tune everybody
knows.)
When I had gotten to know
my mentor in Hindu matters, Sita Ram Goel, I noticed that he too frowned on
birthdays and shuddered resignedly when he saw his grandchildren partake in the
American fad of birthday celebrations. It was not a matter of which religion,
but of religiosity as such: people aware of heavenly realities are not that
euphoric about a mere birthday, the day an eternal soul takes temporary
incarnation. The fact that spiritual level corresponds inversely with the value
attached to birthdays is best illustrated by the fact that Hindu renunciates
discard from their discourse all their pre-initiation life details, including
their physical birthday. In that sense, it was another sign of mindless
Americanization when, some years ago, thousands of Sri Sri Ravi Shankar’s
disciples flew in to Bengaluru to celebrate their Guru’s birthday. Gurus are
important precisely because they have transcended their personalities: them,
you could call apaurusheya.
Then again, the Hindu
valuation of astrology upgrades birthdays somewhat. Not that the birth
horoscope is intrinsically Hindu: unlike the simple rules a astrocalculation of
auspicious times in genuinely Vedic astrology, the individualized astrology of
the birth horoscope was imported from Babylon by the Greeks only some two
thousands years ago, a trifle when reckoned on a Hindu timescale. But now
horoscopy has become a part of most Hindus’ lives, so the stellar configuration
at birth is deemed to contain the main features of one’s present incarnation.
It’s only an incarnation, a hundred years at most, but alright, it is more than
nothing.
Why this contemplation of
the birthday principle? This requires a little detour. On the occasion of the Bhumi
Pujan in Ayodhya on 5 August 2020, Anjali George, a leader of the
pro-tradition agitation last year regarding Sabarimala, sent around the reference
to an article in The Hindu (“The conservative challenge to Hindutva”,
Aug. 2020). It said that
“many
Hindu Dharmagurus, including a Shankaracharya, believe that August 5 is an
inauspicious day for the ceremony. According to them, astrologically, and in
consonance with established religious practices, the second day (Dwitiya) of
the dark fortnight (Krishnapaksh) of the Indian month of Bhadrapad
(July-August) is considered inauspicious. Besides, gods are supposed to be
resting during this month and must not be called upon. Despite this, the
Bharatiya Janata Party government has decided to go ahead with the ceremony on
this date.”
There far more
knowledgeable commenters on Hindu astrology, but even this writer can
comprehend the simple principle that an entreprise intended to grow and prosper
should be started under a waxing moon. To be sure, I have no idea of the
real-life effect of the waxing or waning of the moon at a foundational moment
(it should be easy to test: compare the destinies of a hundred waxing-moon initiatives
with a hundred waning-moon ones), and Hindus are at liberty to dissent from
their own tradition in this regard, but then that should be openly debated in
tempore non suspecto.
The Dharmacharyas had a
point when they protested that the tradition they represent should not be
simply ignored, and certainly not at an important event, religious par
excellence, like the Bhumi Pujan. Some astrology enthusiasts even took it
a bit far by allegedly “sending death threats to Pandit NR Vijayendra Sharma,
who had suggested the Mahurat date- August 5, for the Bhoomi Pujan of Ayodhya’s
Ram Mandir”. (OpIndia, 4 Aug. 2020) Reportedly, the Pandit had selected
four dates, three of them with waxing moon, among which Modi had selected 5
August.
Apologists of the
Hindutva movement counter that astrology-believing Hindus are "playing
spoilsport" by pointing out the less-than-perfect constellation. They
relied more on other considerations. As Anjali George comments, what we witness
is “the growing process of de-ritualisation of the Hindu religion, primarily by
the trustees of Hindutva, thereby pitting Hindutva against a section of
religious authorities”. To her, it is obviously a repeat of what had happened
in the Sabarimala affair: the Sangh had initially sided with the secularist
disrespect for the traditional religious conventions of the temple, and only
crossed the floor once popular opinion had asserted itself in favour of the
tradition.
What were the “other
considerations” that prompted the RSS-BJP to spurn the three alternative dates
deemed auspicious and prefer 5 August? Very apparently, the reason is a
birthday: it was the first anniversary of the normalization of Kashmir’s
situation within India on 5 August 2019. This was a very good and necessary
move, by itself already justifying all the votes cast for the BJP that had made
this integration of Kashmir possible. But this is a process that has just
started: the institutional normalization should be followed by a normalization
on the ground, including the definitive elimination of the terrorist threat.
When all that has been achieved, it may become time for a birthday celebration.
We can compare it to
India’s Declaration of Independence on 15 August 1947. According to the
Dharmacharyas and every Hindu familiar with the tradition, this was an
inauspicious day totally unbecoming of such a solemn occasion. For starters, it
had a waning moon. But these objections had been overruled by Viceroy Lord
Louis Mountbatten. On 15 August 1945, he had, together with Douglas McArthur
for the US, successfully concluded WW2 in the Asian theatre by receiving the
Japanese capitulation; so he wanted to make the transfer of power an occasion
for celebrating its second anniversary. No doubt this had been an important
moment in his career, but not sufficient to overrule the concerns of a nation
that was, of all things, becoming independent.
To sum up: birthdays
are only relatively important, and they should not be used to subordinate a new
event to an earlier one, much less if it means turning a religious event to a
political one. It is the RSS-BJP that has played spoilsport and created an
avoidable and unnecessary friction within Hindu society over this seeming
trifle of the exact date. Perhaps modern knowledge warrants a rethink of the
place of astrology with Hinduism, but there have been years and decades when
this could have been looked into, and more to come. There are enough shadow
moments for such ratiocination, discussion and consensus-building. Let's
reserve sunny moments for celebrating. Jai Siyaram!
1 comment:
In this article [ https://talageri.blogspot.com/2017/07/hans-henrich-hock-scholar-lying-through.html?showComment=1602415326078#c9172623314794140977 ], Talageri Ji raised the fantastic and a very imperative question
" If the joint Indo-Europeans were together in their Homeland around 3500 BCE, in a historical period when other civilizations (Mesopotamia, Egypt, China) were leaving their archaeological and historical imprints, why is it that the Indo-Europeans, whose every branch in every part of Asia and Europe left us imprints of great historic civilizations in later times, were so mysteriously faceless and anonymous in their Original Homeland and left no archaeological or historical imprints at all? "
The answer to his question was answered by Professor Robin B. Kar, He not only answers Talageri Ji's question, He beautifully and irrefutably proves Indus Valley-Eastern Iran-Bactria was the PIE homeland,
I sincerely recommend you to refer to his work, his work is completely in agreement with Talageri Ji's work
https://www.academia.edu/22456350/Western_Legal_Prehistory_Reconstructing_the_Hidden_Origins_of_Western_Law_and_Civilization_BY_Robin_Bradley_Kar
Post a Comment