According to the Hindu thought salvation or freedom from the bondage of birth and death can be attained by three different methods (margas) viz., Gyan (knowledge), Karma (action) and Bhakti (devotion). During the period of Delhi Sultanate (1206-1526), a series of Hindu saints and reformers set on a movement of religious reform, which adopted the last method, viz, devotion which came to be known as Bhakti Movement. The movement was not altogether new. It first originated in the south and was advocated by Sankracharya. In the middle ages it received impetus from the presence of econoclastic Muslim preachers, who stressed the unity of God, vehemently criticized the Hindu religion and thought and attempted to convert Hindus to Islam by all kinds of means. Hinduism, therefore, tried to defend itself by purging off some of its evil practices such as empty ritual practices, rigours of caste system and image worship. Some of the well- known religious reformers who adopted the cult of Bhakti to fight against the danger of Islam and the Brahmanical tyranny were Rama Nanda, Kabir, Sadna, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and Guru Nanak. They all emphasized with the same sequence of accent the great panacea of the Name. Though they differed here and there in details, they all were unanimous in emphasizing the fundamentals of the Bhakti cult where were as under: -Emotional Worship: chanting the hymns or Bhajans of the Lord in utmost devotion and develop love for him and his creations. Abstention from all sham, insincerity, hypocrisy and cruelty will lead to God. -Guru Bhakti: Every person must attach himself to a spiritual mentor who would guide him to the high path. He teaches men the great lessons of love and secrets to win his love. -Self Surrender or Prapti: a man in love with god should surrender oneself completely to a teacher and be guided by him in everything. -No belief in rituals: the Bhakti reformers vehemently attacked the formalities of religion, ostentatious prayers, penance, pilgrimages, and fasts and performance of sacrifices. -Opposed to the rigidity of Caste system: the caste system was based on inequality and had no place in the doctrine of Divine Love. All are equal and no one should be regarded as high or low. God dwells in the heart of a man and not in an idol or a temple. -No Sanctity of any particular language: the Bhakti reformers do not believe [...]
Archive for March 2nd, 2009
Posted in 
FREE SPEECH
March 2nd, 2009 
Aman It appears that we as a nation are losing our capability for tolerating free speech, which appears contrary to our views or sensitivities. It looks we are so hemmed in by the burdens of propriety or public office or identity politics or regional compulsions or the pressure to conform or other media pressures that unconventional or radical views are suppressed? Are humour, creativity, free speech, the right to be eccentric and a maverick being compromised? It is the boundary of the filth or the obscenity that has been the battlefield of such conflicts. And this is going on since time immemorial. The courts have shown a valor in extending the limits of the tolerance of the society by inclining towards free speech and expressing artistically. Now what we are trying to debate about is not about legal interpretation but about the reduction of the space of simple right to accommodate and broadcast unpopular views. In every example the correctness of the views involved or any agreement with them is least important. The question is of zero violence or disagreement or any punitive judgment on society’s capacity to even understand the contrary views. In the first place our willingness and capability to even think over the possibility of Moninder Pandher’s innocence in the Nithari case. Was it possible that any alternative to his conviction was too disgusting and would have subjected all? The verdict records that Pander was present in Australia at the relevant time but finds him guilty of being abettor on no more than the principal accused’s statement that Pandher must have known since he occasionally lived in the same house. No wonder that no less than the CBI had earlier found Pandher not guilty after detailed investigation. The test of the maturity of the democratic society arises when somebody guilty of outraging our sense of decency is however allowed the benefit of doubt by refusing to let emotion take the place of logic. Hard cases make bad law and collective societal anger and outrage in a hard case will inevitably rebound on innocents in future cases. Take the examples of the Indira Gandhi murder or the Parliament attack case. In both the incidents, I think there would be only few, if any, who would have the slightest doubt about the guilt of the accused. Still both the cases saw acquittals and reduction of sentences as they have [...]
