பக்கங்கள்

வியாழன், 13 டிசம்பர், 2018

GANESA’S BIRTH IS HUMBUG




Ganesa is the most prominent among the Hindu deities, and has been worshipped by all the Hindus. He is called by hundreds of names like Ganapathi, Vinayaka, Vigneswara and so on.  No Hindu can deny that Ganesa is worshipped before the beginning of any activity, and he is also worshipped before any other god.

Let us go into the affairs of Ganesa, the most recognized and the most important of all gods.

Once when Parvati Devi, the wife of Siva, was going to take bath, she wanted to post a sentry to prevent anyone from entering the bathroom. So she rolled the dirt on her body into a lump and threw it on the floor.  It became a boy, to whom Parvati gave the responsibility of guarding the bathroom.  But Siva tried to enter the room and was prevented by the dirt ball of Ganesa who told him not to enter the room.  Siva got angry, cut off Ganesa’s head with  a single sweep of his sword, and made his entry into the bathroom.  When Parvati asked him how he entered the room when there was a guard at the gate, Siva replied that he had cut of the guard’s head. When Parvati heard that her son had been killed, she started rolling on the ground and crying. Seeing this Siva tried to bring the boy back to life by joining the severed head with the body, but was dismayed to find the head missing.  Hence he cut the head of the elephant that was close by and joined it on the body of the boy, to Parvati’s satisfaction. This story seems to have its source in Siva Puranam and Kanda Puranam.


Siva and Parvati happened to see in a forest two elephants (male and female) engaged in sexual union.  This sight induced in Siva and Parvati the desire to have sex and the result was a male child with an elephant’s face.


When Parvati was pregnant, an asura assumed the form of air, entered her womb and severed the head of the child. Parvati brought the child back to life by joining an elephant’s head to the body.  This episode is said to be found in Vinayaka Puranam.


Siva is supposed to have sent his elder son Ganesa to ravage Daksha’s fire sacrifice, when Daksha cut of Ganesa’s head. Then Siva sent his second son Subramanya to carry out the task.  The son went there and saw that his elder brother had been beheaded.  As the head could not be found anywhere, the younger brother joined an elephant head to the body and brought Ganesa back to life.  This episode seems to be found in Dakkayagaparani.


A few things must be accepted.  One is that Ganesa was the son of Siva and Parvati and the other one is that the elephant head is an unnatural formation.

If the most prominent deity has so many contradictory accounts and is supposed have had a birth and an upbringing, what about the other gods?  If a god has a father and the mother, should those father and mother not have their own father and mother?  In that case how can anybody accept that the gods came into being on their own?

It follows that we have to go in search of a different origin for god and the world.

When we start discussing god, it is said that god is one, he does not have a name, a shape or a character, he created himself, he is a form of energy or he is nature.  But later, the same people create crores  and  crores of gods and fabricate cart loads of obscene stories around them.  And we make people believe in them, worship them and conduct festivals for them.  The readers should ponder over the ignorance, fraud and effort involved in all these deeds.

Let us cite one example. At Chidambaram temple there is an elephant headed Ganesa who is inserting his trunk into the genital organ of the goddess (Vallabai) seated near him.  This can be seen by anyone, daily pujas are conducterd and a number of men and women have darshan of the these deities. In some temple cars, there is a Ganesa who inserts his trunk into the organ of a girl, lifts her and keeps her suspended in the air, while she remains there with her legs wide apart.  If anybody were to question about this obscenity, a mythological story is presented by way of explanation.

It seems there was a war betwen a god and an asura, and the god went on killing all the asuras  who appeared in front of him.  But the asuras was coming in multitude like moths, from the organ of a woman.  The god sought the help of Ganesa, who put his trunk into the woman’s organ and sucked away all the asuras who were emanating  from there.  What explanation do the ‘theists’ have for all such obscenities connected with gods?

Will it be enough if we are told that they were all written by somebody in the remote past? Are those writings not treasured even today? Are such gods not worshipped with consorts and vehicles?  We request the readers to ponder over these matters.

There are people who order the reformists how they should behave, and who shout that religion and gods are in danger.  Has anyone of these people who seek popular support come farward to remove such obscenities from religion?

No ‘theist’ is worried about such matters.  And they are interested in conducting Ganesa festival on the appropriate day, and carry on research in that regard.  They keep making speeches on these obscenities. When someone points them out, he is called an ‘atheist’.  We maintain that such activities cannot protect any god or any religion.

– Chitraputran


Courtesy: Kudi Arasu – 26th August 1928
(Periyar wrote the article in the pseudoname, ‘Chitraputran’)
Translated by Prof. A. Ayyasamy

 - the modern rationalist

By | on October 1, 2018

செவ்வாய், 11 டிசம்பர், 2018

PERIYAR BREAKS PILLAYAR IDOLS

By | on October 1, 2018




In 1953, Periyar conducted an agitation of breaking the Pillayar (Ganesa) idols, the purpose for which he putforth in the following words:

“We have to eradicate the gods who are responsible for the institution which portray us as sudras, people of low birth, and some others as Brahmins of high birth.  While the former go on toiling, without any education, whereas the latter can remain without exerting themselves.  We have to break the idols of these gods.  I start with Ganesa because it is he who is worshipped before undertaking any task.”

“When I say I am going to break idols no one should think that I am going to do it inside the temples or that I will enter the temple and create a ruckus there.  No one will enter the temple.  We will either ask potters to make idols resembling the god or buy the painted ones sold in the shops.  We will publicise when and where the breaking is to take place, gather people and break them on the roadsides.  I assure that no one will remove or cause any damage to the temple idols.”

– (From periyar speech at Mangudi, 28thApril 1953)

Periyar clarifies, “There is nothing to feel surprised or hesitant about breaking Pillayar idol.  Please let me know if there were a better means of expressing our feelings, you sudra ministers, sudra members of parliament and the legislature, educators including vice chancellors, reputed millionaires, scholars, lords, former zamindars, former maharajas, Sri La Sri Heads of mutts!  I am prepared to give a patient hearing to you.”

– (From statement by Periyar, ‘Viduthalai’: 07.05.1953)

Periyar chose a day for the idol breaking agitation – 27th May, which was the birthday of Buddha.  The breaking would take place at 6.30 in the evening, he announced.  He said while breaking it, the following announcement must be made. “I am breaking it for having made me born in the low birth, and made me a sudra, a bastard.”

All through the state thousands of idols were broken. A case was filed against Periyar in the court.  In the course of enquiry, the judge Raman Nair asked, “They made Pillayar idols and they broke them.  Why do you question that?” “We had heartburn while seeing Pillayar idol being broken,” was the reply. The judge countered them, “They did not start breaking all of a sudden.  They were propagating for three months.  Why did you foolishly go where the breaking took place?  And get heartburn?”  He dismissed the case.

The religious minded people said that they were happy. “As you go on breaking the idols, the number of idols will increase.  More temples will be built.”

Periyar said, “In that case, everything is fine.  I will give you the idols at my own expense.  You break them and spare me of my strain.”

Periyar made use of the agitation to register his opposition to caste system and varnasarma and to the god who is considered to be responsible for that.

- the modern rationalist

THE RIDDLE OF KRISHNA

THE RIDDLE OF KRISHNA


By | on October 1, 2018 

Thus Spake Ambedkar




Continuation from the previous issue…

Of all the indecencies of Krishna the worst is his illicit life with one Gopi by name Radha. Krishna’s illicit relations with Radha are portrayed in the Brahmavaivarta Purana. Krishna is married to Rukmani the daughter of King Rukmangad. Radha was married to ….. Krishna who abandons his lawfully wedded wife Rukmini, and seduces Radha, wife of another man and lives with her in sin, without remorse.

Krishna was also a warrior and a politician even at a very early age, we are told, when he was in his twelfth year. Every one of his acts whether as a warrior or as a politician was an immoral act. His first act in this sphere was the assassination of his maternal uncle Kamsa. ‘Assassination’ is not too strong a term for it, for though Kamsa had given him provocation, he was not killed in the course of a battle or even in a single combat. The story is that having heard God Krishna’s youthful feats at Brindaban, Kamsa got frightened and determined to secure his death by confronting him with a great athelete in an open exhibition of arms. Accordingly he announced the celebration of a dhanuryajna a bow sacrifice, and invited Krishna, Balarama and their Gopa friends to it. Akrura, an adherent of Krishna, but an officer of Kamsa, was deputed by the latter to bring the brothers to Mathura. They came, determined to kill Kamsa. He had provoked not only them, but other Yadavas also, whom his persecution had compelled to leave Mathura. The brothers were therefore supported by a conspiracy against him. Having arrived at Mathura, they desired to change their simple Gopa dress for a more decent one, and asked for clothes from Kamsa’s washerman, whom they met in the street. As the man behaved insolently with them, they killed him and took from his stock whatever clothes they liked. They then met Kubja, a hunch-backed woman who served as Kamsa’s perfumer. At their request she annointed them with sandal paste and in return was cured by Krishna of her bodily deformity. The Bhagvata makes him visit her on a subsequent occasion and describes his union with her with its characteristic indecency. However, on the present occasion, the brothers annointed by Kubja and garlanded by Sudama, a flower-seller, entered the place of sacrifice and broke the great bow to which the sacrifice was to be offered. The frightened Kamsa sent an elephant named Kuvalayapida to kill them. Krishna killed the elephant and entered the arena. There the brothers encountered Kamsa’s chosen athletes, Chanura, Mustika, Toshalaka and Andhra. Krishna killed Chanura and Toshalaka and Balarama the other two. Frustrated in his plan of securing Krishna’s death by stratagem Kamsa ordered the brothers and their Gopa friends to be turned out and banished from his kingdom, their herds to be confiscated and Vasudeva, Nanda and his own father Ugrasen to be assassinated. At this Krishna got upon the platform on which Kamsa was seated, and seizing him by the hair, threw him down on the ground and killed him. Having consoled Kamsa’s weeping wives he ordered a royal cremation for him, and refusing the kingdom offered him by Ugrasen, installed the latter on the throne and invited his banished relatives to return to Mathura.

The next episode is Krishna’s fight with Jarasandha, emperor of Magadha, and Kalayavana. Jarasandha was the son-in-law of Kamsa. Enraged by Krishna’s assassination of Kamsa, his son-in-law, Jarasandha is said to have invaded Mathura seventeen times and to have been every time repulsed by Krishna. Fearing, however, that an eighteenth invasion would be disastrous to the city, Krishna removed the Yadavas to Dwarka at the west end of Gujarat Peninsula. After the removal of the Yadavas from Mathura, the city was besieged by Kalayavana at the instigation of Jarasandha. While pursuing the unarmed Krishna, however, out of the city, the invader was burnt to ashes, by fire issuing from the eyes of king Muchakunda, who had been sleeping in a mountain cave and whom he had awakened with a kick mistaking him for Krishna. Krishna defeated the army of Kalayavana but while flying to Dwaraka with the booty, he was overtaken by Jarasandha. He, however, evaded his enemy by climbing a hill and flying to Dwaraka after jumping down from it.

Krishna was now, for the first time, married. He married Rukmini, daughter of Bhishmaka, king of Vidarbha. Her father, at Jarasandha’s advice, was making preparations to get her married to Sishupala, Krishna’s cousin and king of Chedi. But Krishna carried her off on the day before the proposed marriage. The Bhagavata says she had fallen in love with Krishna and had addressed a love letter to him. This does not seem to be true. For Krishna did not remain a true and faithful husband of Rukmini. Rukmini was gradually followed by an enormously vast army of co-wives till the number of Krishna’s consorts rose to sixteen thousand one hundred and eight. His children numbered one lakh and eighty-thousand. The chief of his wives were the well-known eight, Rukmini, Satyabhama, Jambavati, Kalindi, Mitrabinda, Satya, Bhadra, and Lakshmana. The remaining sixteen thousand and one hundred were married to him on the same day. They belonged originally to the harem of king Naraka of Pragjyotish whom Krishna defeated and killed at the invitation of Indra, whose mother’s ear-rings had been carried away by Naraka. While paying a visit after the battle to Indra’s heaven in company with Satyabhama, this lady took fancy to Indra’s famous parijat tree. To oblige his wife, Krishna had to fight with the God whom he had just favoured. Indra, though the chief of the Vedic Gods, and though he was helped by the latter on this occasion was indeed no match for the ‘Incarnation of the Supreme Being’ and was forced to part with his favourite flower-tree, which was thus carried to Dwarka and planted there. The story of how he obtained his chief eight wives is very interesting. The story of how he got Rukmini is already told. Satyabhama was the daughter of Satyajit, a Yadava chief who gave her away in marriage to Krishna because he was afraid of him and wished to buy his favour. Jambavati was the daughter of Jambavna, a bear chief, against whom Krishna waged a long war to recover a previous gem he had taken away from a Yadava. Jambavana was defeated and presented his daughter to Krishna, as a peace-offering. Kalindi went through a series of austerities in order to get Krishna as her husband and her devotion was rewarded by the marriage she had sought. Mitrabinda was a cousin of Krishna and was carried off by him from the Svayamvara grounds. Satya was the daughter of Nagnajit, king of Ayodhya and was won by Krishna when he had achieved a brave feat of arms, namely, killing a number of naughty bulls belonging to Nagnajit. Bhadra was another cousin of Krishna and was married by him in the usual way. Lakshmana was the daughter of Brihatsena, king of Madra. and was carried off by him from the Swayamavara grounds.

Krishna’s part in Arjuna’s marriage with Subhadra, sister of Balarama and Krishna’s half sister is noteworthy. In the course of his travels Arjuna arrived at the holy place of Prabhasa, and was received by Krishna on the hill of Raivataka. There he was enamoured of Subhadra and asked Krishna how he could get her. Krishna advised him to carry her off as a brave Kshatriya without depending upon the chances of a Svayamvaram, the usual Kshatriya form of marriage. The Yadavas were at first enraged at this outrage, but when Krishna convinced them that Arjuna would be a very worthy husband for Subhadra, and that by carrying her off he had done nothing unworthy of a hero, they consented to the union. And how could they do otherwise? Krishna did not simply argue like us, poor talkers. He, as we have already seen, had backed his precepts by his example.

It is interesting to note how Krishna disposed of Jarasandha and Sishupala who created trouble at the Rajasuya performed by Yudhisthira. Jarasandha had imprisoned a large number of kings and intended to sacrifice them to Rudra. Unless he was killed and the imprisoned princes released and given an opportunity to pay homage to Yudhisthira, the latter’s claim as emperor could not be established. Krishna therefore proceeded with Bhima and Arjuna to Rajagriha, Jarasandha’s capital, and challenged him to a single combat with anyone of them he might choose. Such a challenge could not be refused by a Kshatriya, and Jarasandha, at the anticipation of death at his opponent’s hand, declared his son Sahadev as his heir apparent and chose Bhima as his opponent. The combat lasted thirteen days, and Jarasandha at length met with a painful death at his rival’s hand. Having put Sahadev on his father’s throne, and invited the released princes to attend Yudhisthira’s Rajasuya, Krishna and his friends returned to Indraprastha.

In due course the Rajasuya came off. Of the various functions and duties connected with the ceremony, Krishna is said to have taken charge of washing the feet of the Brahmans. This is a sure indication of the comparative modernness of the Mahabharata, at any rate, of this story. For in ancient times, even when the supremacy of the Brahmans had been established, the Kshatriyas never paid them any servile honour. However when the sacrifice was over, the time came for Yudhisthira to make presents to the assembled princes, priests and other persons deserving honour. To whom must honour be paid first?

Yudhisthira having asked Bhishma’s opinion on the matter, the latter replied that Krishna was the person to be honoured first. Accordingly Sahadeva at Yudhishtira’s command presented the Arghya, the mark of honour, to Krishna, and the latter accepted it. This upset Sishupala, who made a long speech, challenging Krishna’s right to the honour and abusing the Pandavas for paying any honour and Krishna for accepting it. Bhishma made another speech narrating Krishna’s exploits and achievements at length, and declaring his divinity. Sishupala rose again, rebutted Bhishma’s arguments one after another, and grossly abused him. It is pointed out by Krishna’s recent biographers, that of the charges brought against Krishna by Sishupala, there is no mention of his dealings with the Brindaban Gopis, a sure indication, according to them, that when the Mahabharatha was composed, the story of these dealings of Krishna, a story made so much of by the writers of the Puranas and the later poets, was not conceived. However, at the end of Sishupala’s speech Bhishma, who saw that Yudhishtira was afraid lest Sishupala and his followers might obstruct the completion of the ceremony, said, addressing them that if they were resolved to die they might challenge the divine Krishna himself to fight. At this Sishupala challenged Krishna, who rose in response and narrated his opponent’s numerous misdeeds. Then with the words, “At the request of his mother, my aunt, I have pardoned a hundred of Sishupala’s offences. But I cannot pardon the insulting words he has spoken of me before the assembled princes: I kill him before you all”. He threw his chakra at him and cut off his head.

Actions of Krishna during the Mahabharata War may now be reviewed. The following are some of them:

When Satyaki, Krishna’s friend, was hard pressed by Bhurisrava, son of Somadatta, Krishna induced Arjuna to cut off his arms, and thereby made it easy for Satyaki to kill him.


When Abhimanyu was unfairly surrounded and killed by seven Kaurava warriors, Arjuna vowed the death of the ring leader, Jayadratha, next day before sunset, or, failing that his own death by entering into fire. When the Sun was about to set, and Jayadratha remained unslain, Krishna miraculously hid the Sun, on which Jayadratha, having come out Krishna uncovered the Sun, and Arjuna killed Jayadratha when he was unaware.


Despairing of Drona being ever killed by fair means Krishna advised the Pandavas to kill him unfairly. If he could be made to cast down his arms, he could, Krishna said, be killed easily. This could be done if he was told that his son, Asvathama was dead. Bhima tried the suggested device. He killed an elephant named after Drona’s son and told him that Asvathama was killed. The warrior was somewhat depressed by the news, but did not quite believe it. At this juncture he was hard pressed by a number of sages to cease fighting and prepare himself for heaven with meditations worthy of a Brahmana. This checked the hero still more and he applied to the truthful Yudhisthira for correct information about his son. Finding Yudhisthira unwilling to tell a lie, Krishna overcame his reluctance by a long exhortation, in the course of which he announced his ethics of untruth in the following edifying text from Vasishtha’s Smriti.


“In marriage, in amorous dealings, when one’s life is in danger, when the whole of one’s possession is going to be lost, and when a Brahman’s interest is at stake, untruth should be told. The wise have said that speaking untruth on these five occasions is not a sin.” Yudhisthir’s scruples were stifled, and he said to his preceptor, “Yes, Asvathama is killed” adding in a low voice, “that is, an elephant” which last words, however were not heard by Dron. His depression was complete, and on hearing some bitterly reproachful words from Bhima, he gave up his arms, and while sitting in a meditative posture, was killed by Dhristhadyumna.

When Bhima was unsuccessfully fighting with Duryodhana by the side of the Dvaipayana Lake Krishna reminded him through Arjuna that he had vowed the breaking of his opponent’s thighs. Now striking a rival below the navel was unfair, but as Duryodhana could not be killed except by such an unfair means, Krishna advised Bhima to adopt the same and Bhima did.”


The death of Krishna throws a flood of light on his morals. Krishna died as the Ruler of Dwaraka. What was this Dwaraka like and what sort of death awaited him?

In founding his city of Dwaraka he had taken care to settle thousands of ‘unfortunates’ there. As the Harivamsa said : ‘O, hero having conquerred the abodes of the Daityas (giants) with the help of brave Yadus, the Lord settled thousands of public women in Dwaraka”. Dancing, singing and drinking by men and women married and prostitutes filled the city of Dwaraka. We get a description of a sea trip in which these women formed a principal source of enjoyment. Excited by their singing and dancing, the brothers Krishna and Balarama joined in the dancing with their wives. They were followed by the other Yadava chiefs and by Arjuna and Narada. Then a fresh excitement was sought. Men and women all fell into the sea and at Krishna’s suggestion, the gentlemen began a jalakrida water sport, with the ladies, Krishna leading one party, and Balarama another, while the courtesans added to the amusement by their music. This was followed by eating and drinking and this again by a special musical performance in which the leaders themselves exhibited their respective skill in handling various musical instruments. It will thus be seen what a jolly people these Yadavas were, and with what contempt they would have treated the objections urged nowadays by the Brahmans and such other purists against nautch parties and the native theatres. It was in one of these revels—a drunken revel—that the Yadavas were destroyed. They, it is said, had incurred the displeasure of a number of sages by a childish trick played on the latter by some of their boys. These boys disguised Samba, one of Krishna’s sons, as a woman with child, tying an iron pestle below his navel, and asked the sages to say what child the ‘woman’ would give birth to. The enraged sage said ‘she’ would produce an iron pestle which would be the ruin of the Yadavas. Fearing the worst consequences from this curse, the boys took the pestle to the sea-side and rubbed it away. But its particles came out in the form of erakas, a kind of reeds and its last remaining bit, which had been thrown into the sea, was afterwards recovered and used by a hunter as the point of an arrow; Now it was with these erakas that the Yadavas killed themselves. They had gone in large parties to the holy place of Prabhasa. They indulged in drinking there and this proved their ruin. The evils of drinking there had been found out at length by Krishna and some other Yadava leaders, and it was prohibited on pain of death by a public notification. But the prohibition had no effect. The drunken Yadavas at first quarrelled and then began to fight and kill one another. When some of Krishna’s own sons were killed he himself joined in the fight and killed a large number of his own people. He then went in search of Balarama. He found him in meditative posture and saw his spirit passing out of his body in the form of a large serpent i.e., Sesha Naga, the divine snake whom he had incarnated. Krishna now felt that it was time for him also to pass away. He then bade farewell to his father and his wives, telling them that he had sent for Arjuna, who would take charge of them. Then he seated himself under a tree, hidden by its leafy and outstretching branches, and composed his mind in meditation. While thus sitting, a hunter named Jara mistook him for a deer and hit him with an arrow, one pointed with the last remaining bit of the fatal pestle. Discovering his mistake, the man fell at Krishna’s feet and was pardoned and flew away to heaven, illumining all sides by its dazzling light. Arjuna came and proceeded towards Hastinapur with the surviving Yadavas—men and women. But his good genius having left him he had lost the power of his hitherto mighty arm and his unrivalled skill as an archer. A number of Ahiras, armed only with lathis, attacked his party and carried off many of the women, and he reached Hastinapur only with a small remnant. After Arjuna’s departure the sea engulfed Dwaraka, and nothing was left to speak of the Yadavas, their glories, their domestic broils and their revels.

to be continued….

Source: ‘Dr.Babasaheb Ambedkar’s Writings and Speeches’ Volume IV, Riddles of Rama and Krishna, published by the Government of Maharashtra, 1987
- the modern rationalist

 

THE RIDDLE OF KRISHNA

By | on November 1, 2018 

Continuation from the previous issue…

Yudhisthira having asked Bhishma’s opinion on the matter, the latter replied that Krishna was the person to be honoured first. Accordingly Sahadeva at Yudhishtira’s command presented the Arghya, the mark of honour, to Krishna, and the latter accepted it. This upset Sishupala, who made a long speech, challenging Krishna’s right to the honour and abusing the Pandavas for paying any honour and Krishna for accepting it. Bhishma made another speech narrating Krishna’s exploits and achievements at length, and declaring his divinity. Sishupala rose again, rebutted Bhishma’s arguments one after another, and grossly abused him. It is pointed out by Krishna’s recent biographers, that of the charges brought against Krishna by Sishupala, there is no mention of his dealings with the Brindaban Gopis, a sure indication, according to them, that when the Mahabharatha was composed, the story of these dealings of Krishna, a story made so much of by the writers of the Puranas and the later poets, was not conceived. However, at the end of Sishupala’s speech Bhishma, who saw that Yudhishtira was afraid lest Sishupala and his followers might obstruct the completion of the ceremony, said, addressing them that if they were resolved to die they might challenge the divine Krishna himself to fight. At this Sishupala challenged Krishna, who rose in response and narrated his opponent’s numerous misdeeds. Then with the words, “At the request of his mother, my aunt, I have pardoned a hundred of Sishupala’s offences. But I cannot pardon the insulting words he has spoken of me before the assembled princes: I kill him before you all”. He threw his chakra at him and cut off his head.

Actions of Krishna during the Mahabharata War may now be reviewed. The following are some of them:

  1. When Satyaki, Krishna’s friend, was hard pressed by Bhurisrava, son of Somadatta, Krishna induced Arjuna to cut off his arms, and thereby made it easy for Satyaki to kill him.
  2. When Abhimanyu was unfairly surrounded and killed by seven Kaurava warriors, Arjuna vowed the death of the ring leader, Jayadratha, next day before sunset, or, failing that his own death by entering into fire. When the Sun was about to set, and Jayadratha remained unslain, Krishna miraculously hid the Sun, on which Jayadratha, having come out Krishna uncovered the Sun, and Arjuna killed Jayadratha when he was unaware.
  3. Despairing of Drona being ever killed by fair means Krishna advised the Pandavas to kill him unfairly. If he could be made to cast down his arms, he could, Krishna said, be killed easily. This could be done if he was told that his son, Asvathama was dead. Bhima tried the suggested device. He killed an elephant named after Drona’s son and told him that Asvathama was killed. The warrior was somewhat depressed by the news, but did not quite believe it. At this juncture he was hard pressed by a number of sages to cease fighting and prepare himself for heaven with meditations worthy of a Brahmana. This checked the hero still more and he applied to the truthful Yudhisthira for correct information about his son. Finding Yudhisthira unwilling to tell a lie, Krishna overcame his reluctance by a long exhortation, in the course of which he announced his ethics of untruth in the following edifying text from Vasishtha’s Smriti.

“In marriage, in amorous dealings, when one’s life is in danger, when the whole of one’s possession is going to be lost, and when a Brahman’s interest is at stake, untruth should be told. The wise have said that speaking untruth on these five occasions is not a sin.” Yudhisthir’s scruples were stifled, and he said to his preceptor, “Yes, Asvathama is killed” adding in a low voice, “that is, an elephant” which last words, however were not heard by Dron. His depression was complete, and on hearing some bitterly reproachful words from Bhima, he gave up his arms, and while sitting in a meditative posture, was killed by Dhristhadyumna.

  1. When Bhima was unsuccessfully fighting with Duryodhana by the side of the Dvaipayana Lake Krishna reminded him through Arjuna that he had vowed the breaking of his opponent’s thighs. Now striking a rival below the navel was unfair, but as Duryodhana could not be killed except by such an unfair means, Krishna advised Bhima to adopt the same and Bhima did.”

The death of Krishna throws a flood of light on his morals. Krishna died as the Ruler of Dwaraka. What was this Dwaraka like and what sort of death awaited him?

In founding his city of Dwaraka he had taken care to settle thousands of ‘unfortunates’ there. As the Harivamsa said : ‘O, hero having conquerred the abodes of the Daityas (giants) with the help of brave Yadus, the Lord settled thousands of public women in Dwaraka”. Dancing, singing and drinking by men and women married and prostitutes filled the city of Dwaraka. We get a description of a sea trip in which these women formed a principal source of enjoyment. Excited by their singing and dancing, the brothers Krishna and Balarama joined in the dancing with their wives. They were followed by the other Yadava chiefs and by Arjuna and Narada. Then a fresh excitement was sought. Men and women all fell into the sea and at Krishna’s suggestion, the gentlemen began a jalakrida water sport, with the ladies, Krishna leading one party, and Balarama another, while the courtesans added to the amusement by their music. This was followed by eating and drinking and this again by a special musical performance in which the leaders themselves exhibited their respective skill in handling various musical instruments. It will thus be seen what a jolly people these Yadavas were, and with what contempt they would have treated the objections urged nowadays by the Brahmans and such other purists against nautch parties and the native theatres. It was in one of these revels—a drunken revel—that the Yadavas were destroyed. They, it is said, had incurred the displeasure of a number of sages by a childish trick played on the latter by some of their boys. These boys disguised Samba, one of Krishna’s sons, as a woman with child, tying an iron pestle below his navel, and asked the sages to say what child the ‘woman’ would give birth to. The enraged sage said ‘she’ would produce an iron pestle which would be the ruin of the Yadavas. Fearing the worst consequences from this curse, the boys took the pestle to the sea-side and rubbed it away. But its particles came out in the form of erakas, a kind of reeds and its last remaining bit, which had been thrown into the sea, was afterwards recovered and used by a hunter as the point of an arrow; Now it was with these erakas that the Yadavas killed themselves. They had gone in large parties to the holy place of Prabhasa. They indulged in drinking there and this proved their ruin. The evils of drinking there had been found out at length by Krishna and some other Yadava leaders, and it was prohibited on pain of death by a public notification. But the prohibition had no effect. The drunken Yadavas at first quarrelled and then began to fight and kill one another. When some of Krishna’s own sons were killed he himself joined in the fight and killed a large number of his own people. He then went in search of Balarama. He found him in meditative posture and saw his spirit passing out of his body in the form of a large serpent i.e., Sesha Naga, the divine snake whom he had incarnated. Krishna now felt that it was time for him also to pass away. He then bade farewell to his father and his wives, telling them that he had sent for Arjuna, who would take charge of them. Then he seated himself under a tree, hidden by its leafy and outstretching branches, and composed his mind in meditation. While thus sitting, a hunter named Jara mistook him for a deer and hit him with an arrow, one pointed with the last remaining bit of the fatal pestle. Discovering his mistake, the man fell at Krishna’s feet and was pardoned and flew away to heaven, illumining all sides by its dazzling light. Arjuna came and proceeded towards Hastinapur with the surviving Yadavas—men and women. But his good genius having left him he had lost the power of his hitherto mighty arm and his unrivalled skill as an archer. A number of Ahiras, armed only with lathis, attacked his party and carried off many of the women, and he reached Hastinapur only with a small remnant. After Arjuna’s departure the sea engulfed Dwaraka, and nothing was left to speak of the Yadavas, their glories, their domestic broils and their revels.

Concluded

Source: ‘Dr.Babasaheb Ambedkar’s Writings and Speeches’ Volume IV, Riddles of Rama and Krishna, published by the Government of Maharashtra, 1987

-  the modern rationalist

NO ‘THALIS’ FOR WOMEN IN THIS ‘SELF-RESPECT’ VILLAGE




Arjunan and Thaniarasu who were the first self-respect marriage couple of Chikkedikuppam village, looking at the register book that records such marriages


Shanmugasundaram J


In a state that for long took pride in wearing the Dravidian ideology on its sleeve, the 4,000 families of Chikkedikuppam and other villages – located 60 km from Villupuram, Tamil Nadu – revere Dravidar Kazhagam founder and rationalist Periyar E.V. Ramasamy in more ways than one.

For close to half a century, the villagers have shunned caste, dowry and all forms of superstitions. The married women of Chikkedikuppam and its surrounding villages in the panchayats of Kottapundi, Kottugankuppam, Athianthal and Kovilpuraiyur, do not wear mangalsutras (thali), reflecting the Dravidian concept of self-respect marriages.

“More than a 1,000 couples in and around Chikkedikuppam got married by signing an agreement.  No bride-groom demands or takes dowry from the bride and her family.  In fact, dowry is something unheard of in the village in the last 50 years,” said 85-year-old Arjunan of the village.  Arjunan and his wife Thaniarasu was the first couple to have gone through such a self respect marriage.  They entered into wedlock on January 7, 1968, particularly choosing the day as it was considered inauspicious.

“The couples are leading a happy life, with children and grandchildren.  Women are given more importance in our families,” said Arjunan’s son Periyar, who runs a school named E.V. Ramasamy.

They have also been naming their children with typical Tamil names – Thendral, ‘Viduthalai’ Virumpi, Mathiazhagan, Thamilthendral, Senthamil Kanini and Thenarasu.  Many of the women, men and youngsters in the village have mastered the martial art of Silambam, turning to it to lead a disciplined way of life.

It all started during the 1960s.  Then, Chikkedikuppam had a dark side to it.  Brewing and selling of arrack was rampant, and many women had lost their husbands to it, recall villagers.

“We desperately looked for ways to wean our men from it.  It was then that we attended a meeting addressed by Periyar at Malaiyanur.  We were moved by his speech, and decided to follow and spread his ideas for self-discipline, gender equality and to do away with caste discrimination,” said N Kathavarayan, who is in his 70s.  He was known as rationalist singer (pagutharivu padakar)during the time and along with other followers of Periyar, propagated his ideologies through dramas.

Source: ‘The Times of India’
The modern rationalist
By | on November 2, 2018

ADI DRAVIDA SELF RESPECT CONFERENCE




We are happy about a significant resolution passed in the Adi Dravida Self Respect Conference held at Nepier Park, Chennai, yesterday (20 July 1929).

“Our large community of six and a half crores of people has been included in Hindu religion, as a result of which we remain untouchables, deprived of equality.  Hence this conference resolves to beseech the government and the legislators not to record our religion as Hinduism and to remove us from the list of Hinduism from all the government documents.”

About three years ago a resolution was passed to the same effect in the conference of SNDP Elava people which was convened at Mudukulathur of Travancore Princely State.  It has resolved that those people must go to some other religion leaving Hinduism, as there was so human freedom in that religion.

Knowing that such a resolution was in the offing, some Christian missionaries, Buddhist luminaries and Arya Samajist attended the (SNDP) conference and propounded the strong points of their own religions.

The SNDP meeting was attended by E.V.Ramasami who said, while supporting the resolution, that there was no immediate need for going to any other religion and we could wait and see for some more time.  If conversion was in fact necessary then the proper choice would be Islam as right then people were afraid only of Mohammedans, among all people.  In that religion all rights were protected except in the case of women.  Christianity in our country was gradually becoming like Brahminic religion, since caste distinctions were observed in it.  Arya Samaj was nothing but another form of Brahminism.  Though Bhuddhist principles were decidedly better than those of any other religion, at present only Islam had the capacity to control Brahminism to assure real freedom to the people of our country.

When there is no religion called Hinduism, it is improper to call people by that name.  When that is the case, using the name and denying human rights along with the rights to use temples, water sources, streets and schools is the most unjust and unfair practice.


It was decided, as per his advice, that there was no immediate need for conversion.

Now, the Adi Dravida Conference too has resolved to get away from Hindu religion though not to join any other religion. Some people may ask how to call them in that case.  There is no need for them to have any distinct name.  If need be, they may be called Indians.  If it were be pointed out they had to be registered under some name, the 65 crores of untouchables could be called non-Hindus just as 20 crores of people who are known as Hindus are politically referred to as non-Mahammedam.

When there are non-Brahmins and non-Mohammedans, heavens would not fall if there were to be group of people called non Hindus.   No disgrace would be caused to them on that account.  At any rate, we feel that the disgrace cannot be greater than what is caused by being called Hindus.  When there is no religion called Hinduism, it is improper to call people by that name.  When that is the case, using the name and denying human rights along with the rights to use temples, water sources, streets and schools is the most unjust and unfair practice.

Some people contend that we are alone in stating that there is no religion called Hinduism because of a lack of knowledge and induced by our hatred for Brahmins.  But let us see what K. Subramania Pillai, a bilingual scholar in English and Tamil, veteran in religious scholarship, and a man of sharp intellect, has uttered on this point in Sentamil Selvi (Tamil monthly) seven or eight years ago.

“The first point people have to etch firmly in their minds is that there is no religion called Hinduism.

The Persian word ‘Hindu’ which denoted the residents of Sindhu valley was changed to Indus by the Greeks and was used by all westerners to denote the people of the land; the land itself was called India.  The Word Hindu is not found either in Tamil or in Sanskrit.

Only those who have no knowledge whatsoever of religions will call their religion ‘Hindu Religion’  just as European, American or English stands for the civilization of those people and not for their religion, the word Hindu stands for the civilization of the people spread from Himalayas upto Cape Comerin, and not for their religion.  Swami Vivekananda also has expressed the same opinion in many of his speeches.  A religion will be named after its deity, the chief prophet or its scriptures.  Christianity and Mahammedanism are named after their prophets.  Buddhism or Arugathan also follow suit.  But the word Hinduism does not denote any religious ideas.”  Pillai has confirmed that Swami Vivekananda is of the same opinion.  It is not clear how long we should tolerate the vandalisation of 20 crores of people and a prosperous country in the name of a nonexistent religion and opportunistic policies to suit selfishness of the rulers.

On another occasion Brahmin called Dr. S. Subramania Ayyar observed in his own paper, Commonweal.

“If the present condition of the Hindu people is pondered on the dilapidated and disorderly construction of Hindu religion cannot be used by carrying out repairs here and there and supported with props.

It must be mercilessly demolished and flattened, and another non ostentatious building suitable for the present day use and needs, can be reacted in its place.  That seems to be best thing to do.”

Many more researchers are of the same view.  When this is the case, how many people who are witnessing a fake religion standing in the way of such tasks like stopping child marriages’, acquiring the right for all people to walk on the streets, preventing prostitution carried on in the temples in the name of gods and to stop children being pushed into the bedroom, can be honest courageous and honourable?

Therefore when the Adi Dravidas demand that they should not be recorded as Hindus, we too are in the need for taking such a stand.  If we agree to be recorded as Hindus, we get the title of sudras which lower us to that of Adi Dravidas.  No reformist, or legislator or leader of the society is known to have taken any steps to get rid of the disgrace.  There are people who cry hoarse “Faith is gone, god is gone, religion has gone, mythology is gone,” all to get small rewards, but no one with real human qualities who will say, “Self respect is gone! Human rights are gone, we have become lower than animals” and try to restore human dignity.  Hence it is our belief that soon the day will come when we too will demand to be freed from the shackles of Hinduism just as Adi Dravida brethren are doing now.

Sub Editorial, ‘Kudi Arasu’, 21st July 1929 

Translated by : Prof. A. Ayyasamy

-  the modern rationalist, 1.12.18