Suffer Little Children

With the recent visit of my parents I went along to Sunday Mass. This was something I did every week without fail up until the age of eighteen. For some years I was an alter-boy, and when in primary seven, after hearing a rousing speech by a priest, I almost went off to join the priesthood. The visit back to church again aroused many memories, although the service seemed far longer in duration as a child. My father enjoys the service deeply, as a person with introverted spiritual interest, whereas my mother prefers a more extroverted crying out to God. Although she participates sincerely, she will regret the absence of hymns, a choir and a certain charismatic dynamism. I guess neither is the exclusively right way to worship, but rather just the introvert and extrovert at prayer.
In the reading of the Psalms I was struck by the rationalisation of the personal suffering of the faithful in the way it was described. No doubt every religion struggles with this question: why do those who have turned to God continue to suffer? However, the explanation given in Hebrews 12:5-7, 11-15 was exactly akin to that within the theology of the Bhakti school. The reading was as follows:

My son, when the Lord corrects you, do not treat it lightly; but do not get discouraged when he reprimands you. For the Lord trains the ones that he loves and he punishes all those that he acknowledges as his sons. Suffering is part of your training; God is treating you as his sons. Has there ever been any son whose father did not train him? Of course, any punishment is most painful at the time, and far from pleasant; but later, in those on whom it has been used, it bears fruit in peace and goodness. So hold up your limp arms and steady your trembling knees and smooth out the path you tread; then the injured limb will not be wrenched, it will grow strong again.

When religions offer the alleviation of suffering, the practitioner by a certain point notices that she/he is still suffering, perhaps even more than others. So why continue? Well passages like the above assist us to make some sense of our suffering, even to the point where may we refer to it as ‘mercy’. As with the loving father ideology of the church, the bhaktas see all of their suffering, not as impersonal karma, but rather the direct intervention of God in their life. In the Bhagavata Purana (10.14.8) it describes that those who embrace or manage to tolerate such suffering while always bringing their hearts to God, are the rightful heirs to God’s abode. Although in the verse itself it is indicated that the origin of suffering is in a person’s past misdeeds, the commentators elaborate that it no longer can be categorised as karma. What they teach is that it is God’s intervention, where he is utilising a person’s karma, out of his kindness, to eradicate any traces of material interest that remains in them. Therefore it is not categorically and only a natural and impersonal law of reaction, but rather the intervention into the system by a supreme person acting in our interest. Here is an excerpt from the purport:

The word su-samīkṣamāṇa indicates that a devotee earnestly awaits the mercy of the Supreme Lord even while suffering the painful effects of previous sinful activities. Lord Kṛṣṇa explains in the Bhagavad-gītā that a devotee who fully surrenders unto Him is no longer liable to suffer the reactions of his previous karma. However, because in his mind a devotee may still maintain the remnants of his previous sinful mentality, the Lord removes the last vestiges of the enjoying spirit by giving His devotee punishments that may sometimes resemble sinful reactions. The purpose of the entire creation of God is to rectify the living entity's tendency to enjoy without the Lord, and therefore the particular punishment given for a sinful activity is specifically designed to curtail the mentality that produced the activity. Although a devotee has surrendered to the Lord's devotional service, until he is completely perfect in Kṛṣṇa consciousness he may maintain a slight inclination to enjoy the false happiness of this world. The Lord therefore creates a particular situation to eradicate this remaining enjoying spirit. This unhappiness suffered by a sincere devotee is not technically a karmic reaction; it is rather the Lord's special mercy for inducing His devotee to completely let go of the material world and return home, back to Godhead.

In simple terms the above passage is saying that even after the surrendering to God, some lessons still have to be learned. Therefore the gracious parental figure sets about his work. For those who see their greatest suffering as the grace of God and a lesson to be learned, the ultimate freedom from suffering is to be had (after death?).
Whatever the rational, both the faithful and the unfaithful suffer through the entirety of their lives. Perhaps one form of suffering is tolerable in the fact that we attribute meaning to it and presume an end to it. Such faith sustains our optimism. However, more than this there may be a sort of pleasure in it for the faithful, perhaps she or he feels themselves to be the object of interest, love and concern. I believe that child psychology do recognise an inner content within the punished child who feels cared for. Perhaps when all is said and done, that is the sense of what lies behind the above said: ‘it bears fruit in peace and goodness’. The Bhakti commentator Visvanath Cakravarti offers that God tops up the heart with joy (rasa) in proportion to the adversity. In both cases there is recognition of some positive emotion or position amidst or following the experience of suffering.
Certainly what can be said is that for the Christians and the Bhaktas suffering does not end in this life. It is both false and misleading to allure others by insisting that it does. What does change is that religion interprets it in relation to a paternal God’s kindness and correction, and remains forever the optimist. In the height of suffering there may be a certain pleasurable experience, that of either the masochist feeling pleased at being chastised or a supernatural reciprocation that uplifts us.
Well where do I stand on all this and in my meagre life’s experience? l I certainly can say for sure that I suffer. At times it has been so intense that I could have become embittered toward God, like a son who has been overly punished. However, in recovering from the shock of it I continue to rationalise it as grace and a lesson to be learned. Perhaps I still lack in thankfulness or request that such lessons come in doses and not downpours. Whether God’s intervention or karma, I can’t help but resolve that somewhere in the past, or a past life, I have wronged nature and its inhabitants. The suffering has begun with me and in one sense ends with me. With faith I accept the rationalism as is taught by the church and the Bhaktas, it is an explanation in the absence of a better one. And in the absence of us truly knowing, the best interpretation that saves me from the absence of meaning and absolute pessimism will have to do.
The rationalisation of suffering is important for religions and the faithful, because it can be said for sure that there is no tangible end to it in this life.

Learning From Our Youth

A young friend of mine: Yaajan Govindia, was told yesterday he had a life threatening illness. Otherwise of perfect health, Yaajan has been known to all of our community as a soft hearted and well-spoken gentleman. His devotional fervor and enthusiasm for service is known to us all.

Hearing of Yaajan's condition I immediately called him at the hospital. He thank me for calling and told me not to worry; he was accepting his situation as the 'mercy of Krishna' and for his personal 'purification'.

As an older practitioner of Krishna consciousness, I was in a state of shock hearing of the most difficult situation of Yaajan, and as a child he exhibited such gravity and wisdom; he thank me kindly for my prayers. He was even humorous on the phone.

Whatever has to be, we are all praying that Yaajan will be well very soon. However even amidst such challenge Yaajan is clearly, spiritually- very well.

Hare Krishna

Chapter Four: Jnana Yoga ‘Transcendental Knowledge’

Theme: The Transformative Power of Transcendental Knowledge.

Note: From chapter three the context of Yoga has been contained to the sphere of working within the social state as opposed to relinquishing it. Now work, what has been feared as the source of karma, is transformed to a spiritual status and therefore bears no reaction.

Verse 1- 3

Summary: Spiritual knowledge is eternal; appearing lost, it is re-established by Krishna.

Essence: The antiquity and etiquette of disseminating knowledge.

Verses 4- 15

Summary: Supreme Krishna comes to protect, punish and re-establish dharma. Those who act in knowledge of Him are transformed spiritually.

Essence: Who Krishna is, why He comes, and what comes of knowing Him.

Verses 16- 24

Summary:A person in knowledge, acts steadily with detachment, sense control, equanimity, without avarice and transcends karma.

Essence: Acting in knowledge with detachment is a spiritual state.

Verses 25- 35

Summary: There are varieties of sacrifices stemming from action. They all culminate in knowledge, and the best is performed in knowledge. Get knowledge from one who has it and you will become a seer.

Essence: Get knowledge and become a seer.

Verses 36- 42

Summary: The faithful are transformed by the power and subliminality of knowledge. Act inspired by knowledge.

Essence: Arise empowered by knowledge.

Can't See the Wood for the Trees: The Guru Preoccupation

This is written in response to conversations that always end up divided over guru issues:

Mediation between the supernatural and people, always becomes a problem. The mediators grapple for power, monopoly, recognition, influence and control of the flock. Big buildings, big symbols, big books (and yes big beads), stand in for what is absent and convince us of their authority.

The genius of Sri Chaitanya was that he gave God to people in a form they could embrace Him personally without the corrupted mediator. He gave God's names, to take home and to celebrate together without a price or even rite of passage.
'Diksapuruscarya vidhi, apeksa na kare': nothing is require just chant with your tongue. In any state, clean or unclean, of any caste, of any sex, at anytime; just love Krishna and sing his name. It's that simple, his message.

Caitanya dev, turned the entire social structure of India on its head, by his message of love. Above all is the lover of God, not who is clever, clean or strong. Externally he lived within the varna system, but internally he rejected it.

Love, empowerment and benevolence combined with humility to the extreme; a mad person often incoherent.

We are lost and very insignificant. Which one of us has not screwed up, or been compromised and then corrected by whom we have hurt. Proud, morally challenged and condescending, to often the reality of preaching movements: those who discriminate against and possess, through deliverance, the 'lesser'.

Why are we obsessed by 'gurus', it has become our bread and butter. We need to be with people who love Krishna, guru or not. We need friends of abundant heart, guru or not; and we need to love and support each other, gurus or not.

In past young people often approached me and said 'can you be my siksa guru' and I say 'no', better you look for a Krishna conscious 'friend', such friends who care conscientiously are rare. Why complicate a friendship with such classical terminologies.

I think many of us are exhausted with many of such topics and hanker to be among friends, who allow us some peace and a little dignity, and who are happy to talk about Krishna, and trivia like 'how are you my friend'.

A positive alternative, in the margins if it must be. Where 'love' rules supreme.

Note: These thoughts are presented not in attempt to undermine the 'guru', so to speak. They are simply to bring attention to what must lie behind the names and titles that we use in a devotional setting. The Krishna conscious friend, that we depend on and who shelters us, is the guru; and not necessarily the other way round. Therefore, the guru is refered to as sudrdha-suahrdah, the firm friend.

The Role of Women

The subjugation of women was not something unique to the East. The definition and subjugation of women by men has been a universal phenomenon. But it is remarkable how quickly we forget how prominent and recent such subjugation was in our own British society. As is seen in the above newspaper clipping, the expectation of women was the service of men, and almost to the point of hilarity.

In Vaisnava circles the woman's voice is still too isolated from the discourses that determines their imagined or expected identities. As such the dominant males simply draw on ancient texts and expect compliance. Whenever challenged, men often throw the book of dharma at their wives,or even female colleagues, and thus project an identity and role upon them, which may well be far from the reality.

Our social futures are largely determined by our present discourses, and the womens presence in them is still largely nonexistent.

Easter Message: Who Moved the Stone?

This morning a newsletter for the local church was posted through my door, with an all but sensational title: ‘So who did move the stone?’ I guess being Easter, it is a time when all good Christians will be focusing on the miraculous events of Christ and the significance that they feel lies behind them. However, reducing the potential evidence for Christ’s rising from the dead (as the leaflet does), to the question of ‘who moved the stone’ seems all but divinely inspired and rather paltry.

In the newsletter ‘sceptics’ are accused of not being able to answer the question, which really doesn’t come as much of a surprise considering the event was supposed to have happened over two thousand years ago. Then the idea that ‘roman soldiers’, ‘roman authorities’, ‘Jewish leaders’ and ‘Jesus’ own followers’ moved the stone are ruled out on the basis of childlike assumptions.

The hypothesis drawn from the assumptions (which is by no means a substantial form of evidence), and which is presented as being the ‘only answer’ is that ‘Jesus rose from the dead’. Thus by his ‘conquering death’ he gives Christians ‘hope’. In the rest of the leaflet there wasn’t a word about Christ’s teaching.
Surely a life’s tangible experience of spirituality and inner joy would be far more evidential of Christ activities and teachings, than flimsy assumptions about who may or may not have move a stone thousands of years ago. The ‘stone’ question may never be empirically proved or disproved, and does that really matter? Is it something that any person would want to hinge their faith upon?

Drawing our attention to magic, as in stone moving or ceremonious powers, is something that priest, and Brahmins or more generally: those who mediate on behalf of what may exist beyond our perception; often do to convince us of the meaning they are trying to make. Supernatural events, or powers or often threats; have a tremendous effect on the vulnerable, superstitious or hopeless mind. We become manipulated by fear or hopeful of gain by the idea of magical events. We may presume that a person must be speaking with authority if they can do magic, or refer to someone who did, long before recorded history (beyond disproof). But good and bad persons in history have all been reported for using magic. So why should magic be taken so seriously?

Surely it is the teachings, when implemented in our lives; and the gracious and divine experience they have in effect, that stands as the proof of meaning in the words of any prophet. It cannot be all profit for the prophet; the practitioner must share in the fruits of a divine life. In all eventuality, and as ancient wisdom suggests: ‘param drstva nivartante’ sustainable spirituality cannot be based on ‘hope’ and promises alone, rather the personal experience of a higher reality must arise. So if the stone of material life does roll aside, by ones efforts and/or the help of others, and spirituality rises from within; then who should doubt the significance of Easter Sunday.