Cartesian
Thoughts On Hindu Stone Gods
By FRANCOIS GAUTIER
http://www.timesofindia.com/today/05edit5.htm
WE westerners are brought up on the good old values of
Logic and Cartesian Reason - from Descartes, French philosopher, mathematician
and physicist, who in his Discourse of the Method elaborates a system whereby
doubt is methodically used to analyse any unknown phenomenon. He is also the man
who said, ``I think, therefore I am''. We are taught right from childhood to
believe, like Saint Thomas, only what we can see and to have faith only in what
we experience ourselves. A few of us, whose parents have Marxist leanings, are
also injected with a good dose of atheism - that is to disbelieve in the
unnatural, the supernatural, the religious, and generally what is invisible to
the eye.
This is why many of us when we come to India, have
difficulty with the way Hindus adore Gods in the forms of statues. How in heaven
can there be any form, any divine presence in a piece of stone, or even more so
in a Lingam? You must have noticed how uneasy some of the western tourists look
when they are in a living temple, whether in Badrinath, or Meenakshi: they are
stirred by memories of old childhood stories of how Christian missionaries had
to battle these superstitious beliefs in idols (the word idolatry implies that
which is worshipped blindly, in an un-Cartesian manner) to install an altar or a
church.
Yet, a few westerners, instead of rejecting outright
this ``pagan'' habit that Hindus have had for millenniums of adoring stone Gods,
have tried to analyse it, using this very Cartesian reason and logic with which
we are endowed, thanks to our rigorous education. One such person was Alexandra
David-Neel, famous writer, explorer, spiritualist, and the first woman to have
penetrated Tibet. In her book, `India as I saw it' (Plon. Paris, 1951), she
remarks: ``The energy which the Hindus project on the idol is not totally
immaterial. It could be assimilated to a subtle substance, which is impregnated
with the thoughts, desires and images of the seekers''. And she elaborates
further: ``The existence, real or not, of the deity represented has no
importance, what matters is the accumulation of the psychic forces in the
statue''. Thus, she continues: "Images of Gods are fulfilling a function
similar to what electricity does to a car battery. In this particular case, it
is the adoration of the devotees, which charges the statues. And once fully
charged, one can draw energy out of it, because like a battery, the statue will
not get empty if one continues to charge it with energy through the cult, and
the concentration of the prayers and aspirations of the faithful''. And Mrs Neel
concludes: ``It is thus that an idol which has been adored for centuries by
believers, is now charged with a considerable sum of energy due to the
repetition of incalculable acts of devotion, during which the faith,
imagination, aspirations, desires of these untold crowds of believers have been
directed towards the image of their divinity''. Her wrapping up of the subject
is simple: Gods are thus created by the energy emitted by the faith in their
existence.
Will this rather ``scientific'' explanation of idol
worshipping be sufficient to convince the disbelievers? We are not so sure. This
reminds one of the story of our friend Bruno Philip, ex-correspondent in India
of Le Monde. He himself, like any good Frenchman, tended to disbelieve in
supernatural stories. When he heard that Ganesh was drinking milk a few years
back, he went to the nearest temple with a smirk on his face. But lo, he saw
with his own eyes the God actually drinking the milk. However, when he
telephoned Le Monde in Paris with his story, he was told that he must have drunk
too much the night before and advised to go back to bed!
But then, Bruno could have told his disbelieving boss
in Paris that all religions, however Cartesian they are, have their share of
beliefs in the supernatural and unscientific. Is it more rational or Cartesian
(than worshipping stone idols) to think, for instance, as the Catholics do, that
Mary conceived a child while remaining a virgin, or that Christ came back from
the dead and ascended physically to heaven (and not in his subtle body, which is
more likely), or that Jesus multiplied breads and cured incurable people? Even
today, American preachers who come to India carry full page advertisements in
newspapers promising whoever comes to their rallies that not only will they
encounter God, but they will also witness miracles. Descartes must be shaking
his head, up there in heaven.
|