Here is an example of how religion permits nut-jobs to control our lives.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Girl-who-plucked-eyebrow-not-a-true-Sikh-says-HC/articleshow/4598931.cms
Saturday, May 30, 2009
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Homam
The other day I went to a Sudarshana Homam, just in time for prasadam ;-) Afterwords, the lead vadyar performing the homam struck up a chat with me. He casually mentioned that he is performing these homas on a regular basis for Lokakshema, i.e. for the benefit of all life on earth. Wow, I thought! What a fantastic statement? This startled me a little bit and my mind wandered off.
What did he mean by lokakshemam and how does reverentially depositing clarified butter, cooked rice, nuts and fruits, and silk garment into burning fire, accompanied by chanting of Vedic mantras, produce lokakshemam?
For one thing, there is the dhakshinai paid to the Vadyars. That surely will help their families cope with the daily struggle for survival. This is surely kshemam resulting directly from the homam. But can we say this is lokakshemam? There is kshemam for the families of the vadyars participating in the homam, but these families cannot constitute all life on earth. At this time, I could hear the vadyar I was talking to, protesting, "I don't take even a paisa for myself from the contributions bhakthas make for the homas." If this is true, given the sincerity of the vadyar I have no reason to doubt him, alas not even his family seems to be getting any kshemam (benefit), let alone the entire world. There is not even kudumbakshemam (family benefit), yet there is this casual claim of lokakshemam.
Obviously, by lokakshemam the vadyar was not referring to monetary benefit for a limited number of brahmin families. What else could the Vadyar mean by lokakshemam? A friend of mine once argued that money spent on homams do benefit a lot of people like small vendors selling fruits, groceries, flowers, the auto-rickshaw driver, et al. This is definitely true, a lot of people do indeed benefit when such events are held. Even if the vadyar does not take a single paisa as dakshinai, money will be spent on provisions, etc. Money does get injected into the local economy initiating what economists call the multiplier effect. But, this multiplier effect is not a result of the homam per se, like the depositing of stuff into the holy fire while chanting vedic mantras. It is a secondary effect common to all events economic, religious or secular. Even if the event was not a homam, and it was just a birthday party, the benefits resulting from economic multiplier effect would still manifest. So, this cannot be counted as lokakshemam resulting strictly from the homam that could not possibly come about with a secular event.
In fact activities that are purely secular and aimed directly for the benefit of the poor and powerless in our society will have lot more lokakshemam than any homam. Therefore, if lokakshemam is defined in monitary terms, we are better off by cutting the middleman and directly spending the money on social welfare schemes. We can build more hospitals, schools, factories, and industry, and a far wider world will benefit, economic multiplier effect and all.
Well, may be it is unreasonable to restrict the scope of benefits from a homam to just monetary outcomes. What about outcomes such as rain, health, and general welfare of the population that are not measured in terms of rupees? These are indeed lokakshemam reaching a wide section of the population.
But, the problem is in establishing a cause-and-effect relationship between homam and these non-monetary outcomes. If only there is a way of establishing a cause-and-effect link, we can convince the governments of poor nations experiencing severe drought to perform a series of homams and derive the benefits they sorely need and deserve. Millions of lives can be saved or improved. Imagine the actual lokakshemam that will result. So, one must not be content performing monthly homams in just one location. The lokakshemam will be very limited. To ensure large scale lokakshemam, nothing can be more important than clearly establishing a direct link between the performance of homam and the claimed benefits. If this is done the skeptics can be made to shut up. Then, a large number of these homams can be performed. The resulting large scale lokakshemam will motivate even more nations to follow suit and the mother of all lokakshemam will result.
Fortunately, we do have a way of establishing a cause-and-effect relationship that even an avid rationalist must accept. A statistical design of experiment can be very easily setup and the efficacy of homams in generating the claimed benefits can be studied. Since the claimed benefits can be objectively measured there is no other situation better suited for a statistical study. This kind of statistical approach is used routinely in many fields, such as agriculture, medicine, business, and even political science where the response to measure is opinions of people that cannot be objectively measured. If a statistically significant relationship between the performance of homams and outcomes such as rain, agricultural yield, etc. is established, then there is no need to demand acceptance of the cause-and-effect relationship purely on faith. Even strict rationalists can no longer ridicule the performance of homams.
The funding for such a study must come from the faithful. The skeptics cannot be asked to fund such a study as they reject the whole idea as silly. If lokakshemam will indeed result from homams it is incumbent upon the faithful to use some of the hundreds or even thousands of crores of rupees in the coffers of religious institutions to conduct this study and ensure the homam induced lokakshemam reaches as much of the suffering humanity as possible. Not doing it can downright be immoral. However, I doubt whether anyone well versed in the Vedas and the performance of homams will take it upon themselves to conduct such a study. They will continue to insist on blind faith.
Lastly, by lokakshemam the Vadyar probably did not have any of this at all in his mind. Perhaps he was referring strictly to spiritual lokakshemam. If that is the case, the vadyar is probably completely on the wrong track. Spiritual well being, according to Sri Vaishnava doctrine, is linked to one's individual karma. Sri Vaishnva doctrine teaches only Sriman Narayana can do anything about karma, and that is contingent upon personal action such a panca samskaram and, for some, a separate act of bharanyasam as well. One can argue that the presence of an individual in a homam like this, even reluctantly, may motivate him or her to eventually seek bharanyasam in the same way an act of chasing a cow around a temple, even if it is in the anti-clockwise direction, can start a series of events in one's life that culminate in the performance of panca samskaram/bharanayasam and the achievement of the ultimate goal. This is perhaps the lokakshemam the vadyar had in mind. We are now down to the realm completely outside the material world. Even in this case, the benefit can only reach those in attendance, hardly deserving the lofty claim of lokakshemam.
What did he mean by lokakshemam and how does reverentially depositing clarified butter, cooked rice, nuts and fruits, and silk garment into burning fire, accompanied by chanting of Vedic mantras, produce lokakshemam?
For one thing, there is the dhakshinai paid to the Vadyars. That surely will help their families cope with the daily struggle for survival. This is surely kshemam resulting directly from the homam. But can we say this is lokakshemam? There is kshemam for the families of the vadyars participating in the homam, but these families cannot constitute all life on earth. At this time, I could hear the vadyar I was talking to, protesting, "I don't take even a paisa for myself from the contributions bhakthas make for the homas." If this is true, given the sincerity of the vadyar I have no reason to doubt him, alas not even his family seems to be getting any kshemam (benefit), let alone the entire world. There is not even kudumbakshemam (family benefit), yet there is this casual claim of lokakshemam.
Obviously, by lokakshemam the vadyar was not referring to monetary benefit for a limited number of brahmin families. What else could the Vadyar mean by lokakshemam? A friend of mine once argued that money spent on homams do benefit a lot of people like small vendors selling fruits, groceries, flowers, the auto-rickshaw driver, et al. This is definitely true, a lot of people do indeed benefit when such events are held. Even if the vadyar does not take a single paisa as dakshinai, money will be spent on provisions, etc. Money does get injected into the local economy initiating what economists call the multiplier effect. But, this multiplier effect is not a result of the homam per se, like the depositing of stuff into the holy fire while chanting vedic mantras. It is a secondary effect common to all events economic, religious or secular. Even if the event was not a homam, and it was just a birthday party, the benefits resulting from economic multiplier effect would still manifest. So, this cannot be counted as lokakshemam resulting strictly from the homam that could not possibly come about with a secular event.
In fact activities that are purely secular and aimed directly for the benefit of the poor and powerless in our society will have lot more lokakshemam than any homam. Therefore, if lokakshemam is defined in monitary terms, we are better off by cutting the middleman and directly spending the money on social welfare schemes. We can build more hospitals, schools, factories, and industry, and a far wider world will benefit, economic multiplier effect and all.
Well, may be it is unreasonable to restrict the scope of benefits from a homam to just monetary outcomes. What about outcomes such as rain, health, and general welfare of the population that are not measured in terms of rupees? These are indeed lokakshemam reaching a wide section of the population.
But, the problem is in establishing a cause-and-effect relationship between homam and these non-monetary outcomes. If only there is a way of establishing a cause-and-effect link, we can convince the governments of poor nations experiencing severe drought to perform a series of homams and derive the benefits they sorely need and deserve. Millions of lives can be saved or improved. Imagine the actual lokakshemam that will result. So, one must not be content performing monthly homams in just one location. The lokakshemam will be very limited. To ensure large scale lokakshemam, nothing can be more important than clearly establishing a direct link between the performance of homam and the claimed benefits. If this is done the skeptics can be made to shut up. Then, a large number of these homams can be performed. The resulting large scale lokakshemam will motivate even more nations to follow suit and the mother of all lokakshemam will result.
Fortunately, we do have a way of establishing a cause-and-effect relationship that even an avid rationalist must accept. A statistical design of experiment can be very easily setup and the efficacy of homams in generating the claimed benefits can be studied. Since the claimed benefits can be objectively measured there is no other situation better suited for a statistical study. This kind of statistical approach is used routinely in many fields, such as agriculture, medicine, business, and even political science where the response to measure is opinions of people that cannot be objectively measured. If a statistically significant relationship between the performance of homams and outcomes such as rain, agricultural yield, etc. is established, then there is no need to demand acceptance of the cause-and-effect relationship purely on faith. Even strict rationalists can no longer ridicule the performance of homams.
The funding for such a study must come from the faithful. The skeptics cannot be asked to fund such a study as they reject the whole idea as silly. If lokakshemam will indeed result from homams it is incumbent upon the faithful to use some of the hundreds or even thousands of crores of rupees in the coffers of religious institutions to conduct this study and ensure the homam induced lokakshemam reaches as much of the suffering humanity as possible. Not doing it can downright be immoral. However, I doubt whether anyone well versed in the Vedas and the performance of homams will take it upon themselves to conduct such a study. They will continue to insist on blind faith.
Lastly, by lokakshemam the Vadyar probably did not have any of this at all in his mind. Perhaps he was referring strictly to spiritual lokakshemam. If that is the case, the vadyar is probably completely on the wrong track. Spiritual well being, according to Sri Vaishnava doctrine, is linked to one's individual karma. Sri Vaishnva doctrine teaches only Sriman Narayana can do anything about karma, and that is contingent upon personal action such a panca samskaram and, for some, a separate act of bharanyasam as well. One can argue that the presence of an individual in a homam like this, even reluctantly, may motivate him or her to eventually seek bharanyasam in the same way an act of chasing a cow around a temple, even if it is in the anti-clockwise direction, can start a series of events in one's life that culminate in the performance of panca samskaram/bharanayasam and the achievement of the ultimate goal. This is perhaps the lokakshemam the vadyar had in mind. We are now down to the realm completely outside the material world. Even in this case, the benefit can only reach those in attendance, hardly deserving the lofty claim of lokakshemam.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
