Sabarimala: an ego lens

Part II: http://vedham.blogspot.com/2018/11/sabarimala-debate-analysis.html

I'd earlier argued that freedom of speech must be legally absolute, while individually one should speak truth, keep an open mind for dissent & be civil.

However, why are people behaving the way they are behaving in the Sabarimala episode? Are some people just choosing to be evil while others are good? Why would some choose to be evil?

The answer is simple. No one thinks of themselves as evil. All of us see ourselves as good & doing good. This includes some of the worst tyrants in history; they were sure of their correctness.

When we are asked to do something, the nature of the mind is to rebel. Why should I do what you're asking me to do? Who are you to ask me to do this?

A few decades back, in South India, it was common for every married woman to wear a Mangalsutra chain, flowers in her hair, a bindi on her forehead & wear bangles; which were symbols of marriage. In a personal story, a relative of my friend rebelled against this tradition. Who are you to ask me to wear it? I will not do so. Years later, her husband died. Now, she decided. Why am I not supposed to wear these? I will now do so.

It is simply fashionable the mind to think of itself as a rebel and do the opposite of what it is asked to do.

Why do we behave in this manner? Because it is in the nature or our ego & mind to do so.

The ego manifests itself in multiple aspects. We look different, behave different and think different. In addition, the ego attaches itself to different labels. I am a woman, therefore I'll vote for a woman (or vice-versa). I'm a man & I want to look cool to society & to myself, so I'll support women over men any day, even if such support becomes unjust to men. Let us say, you drive a BMW car. Someone says: "These BMW drivers are snobs". Your ego attached to the BMV car will react. This can happen if someone insults your favorite color, gender, political party, political leader, religion etc.

Do you have a faith? How does your mind feel when someone from a different faith converts to your faith? Imagine the reverse. How does your mind feel now? Why does your mind feel the way it feels? Search for: Convert to from . Look at the comments on any popular write up or video. Why do people react the way they react? This is because the ego is attached to that faith.

The greater the attachment of the ego to any identity, the greater the reaction when that identity is threatened.

There are around six known temples with restrictions on women & five known temples with restrictions on men, among millions. On a women's day out, is it decent for men to insist on coming? Or vice-versa? The devotees were traditionally fine with special traditions on some special temples. This was an act of decency.

The women & non-Hindus who filed the court petition & the journalists who wrote against this tradition were not devotees & were unfamiliar with the local tradition. They simply believed that by reforming the tradition of 1 temple amongst millions, they are bringing about a positive revolution. The Supreme Court of India which admitted the petition is an unelected body, where judges are appointed through an opaque political process. Four judges were from the North, unfamiliar with the tradition and the one judge from Kerala was not a Hindu. Who doesn't like to form policy for lesser mortals to follow? This power should be used sparingly. All male judges believed that they are civilizing the natives and ruled against the tradition, while ignoring addressing the opposing arguments in their judgment. The only dissent was from the female judge, who actually understood it. None of these players had any 'skin in the game'. The court also believed that they were bringing about a positive revolution (assuming good intentions).

Were all the women who wanted to enter Sabarimala recently devotees? Their social media posts (writing about sex in front of the deity, posing with drinks/cigarettes, refusing to even say Swamiye Sharanam Ayyappa, carrying sanitary napkins) clearly indicates that they did not observe the voluntary 41 day difficult Vratham (austerities) and that they were not devotees. Why did they behave this way? The non-devotee non-religious feminists were convinced that the restriction was because women were considered unclean & they wanted to break this tradition. In their mind, they were doing the right thing. The non-Hindu but religious folks who wanted to enter had an identity of their own right religion & wanted to desecrate the shrine, because religiously, that's the right thing to do. There was probably an additional incentive of getting into record books; a huge boost to the ego.

The communist government which selectively pounced on this verdict and used Hindu donations to file petitions against the Hindu tradition, with non-believers sitting on the temple board, are convinced of the evil of this religion, without which this world would be a better place. Bring about true equality by trampling upon this regressive tradition. In their mind, they are right.

The devotees (including the women devotees) who protested against the judgment had their attachment to the tradition under threat. Who are these outsides who don't understand us but who want to trample upon our tradition? This ego is under threat. Protest! The communist government responds. How dare they defy us? Another ego under threat. I'll show them my power. Arrest thousands, violently injure & kill devotees, vandalize their vehicles, set a high bail which they can't pay, bring new temple rules, setup media bans, trample the tradition in whatever means possible.

The feminist journalists simply portrayed this as a patriarchal issue, ignoring the nuances. Women were oppressed & it continues! Ignore any data to the contrary. The non-Hindu religious journalists simply reported this negatively or ignored any story that didn't fit with their narrative. Let the heathens figure out how powerless their God is. Maybe they will then turn to the one true God.

Individually, our mind & ego is so powerful, that it sometimes feels like there is nothing we can do. Even people who meditate for years struggle. Collectively as well, this dance of the world's mind & ego is very powerful & creates conflict. It looks like this world is doomed.

However, the light of soul & truth is silent & strong. It will eventually shine through, and lift us individually and lift the world towards eventual liberation, however much the mind & ego will struggle. There is no escape.

In this entire episode, so many people have constantly thought of Ayyappan through various emotions. Per Sambhrama Yoga, even a hateful thought of God is liberating. Ayyapan's word & fame has continued to spread to places who were unaware of him. Maybe this is his divine play.

Fundamentally, the 41 day Vritam is an observance of Yama & Niyama, two angas (limbs) of Patanjali's Ashta-anga Yoga. It is a difficult spiritual penance. Ayyappan is also in a Yogic pose in Sabarimala.

May Swami Ayyappan help the light or our soul shine through quicker. Swamiye Sharanam Ayyappa.

Part IV: https://vedham.blogspot.com/2019/01/sabarimala-skin-in-game-analysis.html

References:
http://vedham.blogspot.com/2018/05/the-yoga-of-hate.html
http://vedham.blogspot.com/2016/08/the-veils-of-soul.html

Sabarimala: a debate analysis

Part I: http://vedham.blogspot.com/2018/10/sabarimala-freedom-of-speech-analysis.html

I'd earlier argued that freedom of speech must be legally absolute, including the right to insult, abuse & mock anything, while having an individual goal of Ahimsa (not hurting).

What happens if the truth is going to mentally hurt someone? What if that person is a friend as well? Should you not speak the truth?

Speaking the truth is Dharma. Ahimsa is also Dharma. When two Dharmas conflict, this is a Dharma Sankatam. How do we resolve this?

A controversy arises when two opinions collide. This can happen at an individual level or at a larger level of society or nations. Should we avoid all controversies? Just be silent? Hey, life is short. Let's have fun, talk about only fun stuff and avoid all these controversies. Is this the right approach? It is only a matter of time before some controversy affects us. Civilization is a fragile thing. There are always barbarians at the gates. The more vigilant a society is, the better it can preserve civilization.

If what you think to be the truth really the truth? Is it simply an opinion? Is your ego & mind simply masquerading an opinion as the truth? Or is it well thought out & backed by facts? If this is indeed the truth, why is the truth going to hurt?

Thiruvalluvar (in his Thirukkural) advises us to make friends with those whose truthful advise may even make us weep when we do something wrong. The truth may hurt if one's mind & ego are very attached to something that is not true. The higher the attachment, the higher the hurt. Conveying the truth in a gentle manner is preferable to lying or remaining silent.

Ok, so I know in my heart that my faith is the only true faith. So, can I gently guide these poor ignorant souls towards the truth?

Examine this in more detail. How do you know that your faith is the only true faith? My book says so. How do you know that your book is true? My book or my prophet says so. How do you know that your prophet is correct? My prophet or my book says so. This is an example of circular flawed logic. Atheism also cannot logically prove non-existence; it is also fundamentally just faith. It is easy to confuse opinion with truth.

Given that it is better to express an opinion that you believe is correct, what to do when a contrary opinion is encountered? Our level of attachment to our original opinion & our state of mind will determine our reaction. The first reaction of the mind is incredulity. What? Really?! You believe that?! That is so patently untrue. Ignore the moron. Or mock and ridicule. Or get upset. Or get angry. Abuse & insult.

What is the right way to respond? Let us take a leaf from ancient India, from the Nyaaya Sutras.

Vaadham is debate or discourse. Vaaku Vaadham in Tamil means a verbal debate. Vivaadham means a debate (in Samskritam & Tamil).

Sam Vaadham is a good debate. When there are two contrary opinions, the truth is in one camp, or another, or somewhere else. What is the truth then? Finding the truth is a sacred process. Coming into a debate with an open mind and respect for your opponent, first the rules of debate and the accepted ways of obtaining knowledge (Pramaanams) are defined. Once an argument is stated, the debater has to restate the argument to the satisfaction of his opponent who originally framed the argument. This is called Purva Paksha. Next comes Uttara Paksha, where the argument is logically dismantled & a counter argument is made. Finally, a debater accepts defeat. This seems inconceivable looking at the quality of today's debates. Some of the greatest philosophical debates of ancient India were called Sam Vaadhams.

Another type of debate is called Jalpa Vaadham. Here, I am convinced that I am right. My only purpose of debating with you is to show that you are wrong, I am right and convert you to my opinion. I will never lose the argument. If I get a good argument, I'll change the premise, the goal posts, introduce irrelevant material, sarcasm, witty rejoinders.

The other type of debate is called Vithanda Vaadham. This is the verbal equivalent of a street fight. No rules apply. Abuse, insult, name-calling, interruptions, disallowing the opponent to speak, all dirty tactics are used in this case.

In the infamous game of dice in the Mahabharatha, once Draupadi is lost, she raises nuanced questions on the nature of her wager. Instead of answering her questions, Dusshasana brutally drags her to the Sabha (court) of Dritirashtra. Dritirashtra is the blind king. He is not just physically blind, he is blind to Dharma (justice) & Neeti (law), and blind in love towards his own sons.

Draupadhi represents herself in the Drithirashtra Sabha & makes nuanced arguments. Instead of logically answering her arguments, the opponents indulge in Vithanda Vaadam, name calling & claiming the absolute binary correctness of their position. Bhishma subtly clarifies her arguments & Vikarna, a Kaurava, explicitly calls out that her arguments are correct. At this point, Karna intervenes & incites Dusshasana to disrobe her.

Rashtra means a country or state. Drithirashtra represents a blind state, that is blind in justice towards its own citizens. Draupadi is the wronged citizen whose nuanced arguments are dismissed by oppressive opponents with a binary mindset. Vikarna is the intelligent person, who can see justice in arguments, though being on the opposing side. Karna represents the media or public opinion that wrongly incite. Dusshasana represents the state forces that humiliate & strip the common people of all dignity.

What does this have to do with Sabarimala? Multiple people have made convincing nuanced arguments regarding the shrine. Good arguments were made in the court of the Supreme Court of India, where the lawyers (Sai Deepak & Parasaran) adroitly & logically answered every argument thrown at them by the judges. The judges, when writing their judgment, simply went ahead & wrote what they wanted to write, without addressing any of the opposing arguments. The state communist government, most of the English India & international media simply chose to ignore these arguments, presenting a flawed narrative of patriarchy. This is Vithanda Vaadham.

The communist state government (which doesn't believe in God) while choosing to appeal other judgments or not implement them, is implementing the judgment with alacrity. It manages the temple boards of Hindus alone (not other religions) & denied them permission to file an appeal. This is the Dritirashtra Sabha.

Thousands of devotees were imprisoned. When five urban Naxals (communists) were imprisoned on an assassination plot (doing a Rajiv Gandhi, per their intercepted letter) on the Prime Minister, the court granted them bail with the message that dissent was the safety valve of democracy. Their imprisonment received international coverage. When over three thousand eight hundred devotees (including women) were arrested with a high bail amount, there is deliberate silence. Does the state really have evidence to charge & imprison thousands of people? This is a blatant violation of civil rights. Protesters (including women) have been injured & one protester has been found dead. Their vehicles were vandalized by the police. Section 144 (curfew) has been imposed by the collector, PB Nooh. The pilgrim route has been blocked. Devotees have been restricted, infringing on their freedom of religion rights. A media ban has also been imposed. This is certainly not what the court ordered in its judgment. There is no outrage, no awards being returned, only deliberate silence on events. The naked hypocrisy of the state & the media is on full display.

May Swami Ayyappa help all of us protect Dharma. Swamiye Charanam Ayyappa.

Part III: https://vedham.blogspot.com/2018/11/sabarimala-ego-lens.html