16 Oct 2024
O Learned and Devoted Servants of God
1a. Someone says PM is not a religious leader and is the PM of a secular country. Please reply on it.
[Smt. Priyanka asked:- Questions raised on Ayodhya Ram mandir & other topics: Padanamaskaram Swami, Some Hindu people I know who are not only atheists and agnostics but also theists have commented negatively about Ayodhya Ram Mandir, religion, and other topics during a big discussion. The following are the long list of comments made by them. Please advise on how one should respond to such arguments. "While I am seeing all the happiness among the Hindus, I also feel bad for all the Muslims who may be feeling scared. I wasn't happy that Modi participated so actively and led this consecration. He is not a religious leader and he is the PM of a huge democratic and secular country. Only thing that bothers me is the role that the PM of India is playing in going out of the way to promote a certain religion."]
Swami replied:- Secularism means following one’s own religion strictly and respecting all the other religions with equal respect. You cannot find fault with the PM because he has to respect the views of the majority as per the norms of democracy. You said that India is not only a secular country but also the country of democracy, where majority is the deciding factor. Unless we achieve universal spirituality, we cannot solve these problems rising among religions.
b. The Ayodhya temple is not on a holy ground. But more of a war victory monument. Please reply on it.
[When I think about Ayodhya temple, I don't think of it as a temple on a holy ground. But more of a war victory monument. So much strife and blood and suffering went into the decisions and construction. At the end of the day, it is a piece of rock. I personally have zero positive feelings around it. All this money and effort would have been better served as a hospital or university or school.]
Swami replied:- Religion brings ethics and ethics brings permanent peace in the country. The Ayodhya issue was settled in the Supreme Court after a long debate and you cannot say that this debate is a war. Progress in education without a spiritual outlook is of no use to humanity.
c. Someone says, ‘Building a temple is not the right thing in an already segregated world, which fuels the fire’. Please reply on it.
["It is definitely alarming to see very educated Indian population feel extremely proud about India publicly doing this much for Hindus! For every Hindu that feels proud, we should also think about all the other religious people who are feeling otherwise! Building this temple was not the right thing to do. In an already very segregated world, why create some fuel to the fire"?]
Swami replied:- If you fear for fueling fire, the fire will continue to burn forever. Even if some little disturbance takes place, it is better to extinguish the fire forever.
d. How is that a holy ground where there was terrorist activity and murder leading to riots with many deaths?
["If we're talking about how places have power or some places are more holy than other, how is its holy ground to build on something where there was a terrorist activity (bombing the mosque), and murder, leading to national riots with thousands of deaths? How is that holy ground? It is like building on a graveyard. So, either God is everywhere and there's no special relevance to the place. There's no need for the emphasis on building in a specific place or it's not holy ground but desecrated ground".]
Swami replied:- The faith of the majority is the point here and not the logic, which cannot convince the rigid faith of age long traditions. First, we have to follow them and then teach the ultimate true philosophy so that when all have realized, we can implement the ultimate truth. Even now, you can go ahead with universal spirituality. But, unless practical realization comes, implementation of the ultimate truth is impossible. We have to follow the natural trend unless it changes by itself or by the effort of some human form of God. Please differentiate theory from practical.
e. Someone says, ‘What bothers me is that India is turning into a religious state.’ Please reply on it.
[Religion, in general, turns people into crusaders, so I don’t expect better than this - this is a victory for many people, most of whom never really cared about Ayodhya till date. So I don’t expect better than this. The only thing that bothers me is that India is turning into a religious state, and these kinds of things have never ended well!]
Swami replied:- You cannot say like this because now everything is well settled and all the groups of public are satisfied. You are trying to kindle the fire again in this issue. Every individual or the country shall be religious following the scripture sincerely so that strict discipline is introduced. At the same time, respecting and loving other religions must also be developed in every country and in every individual.
f. Someone says, ‘There are also enough people, who live great lives without being religious!’ Please reply on it.
["Religion is one path to teach us to live morally and do the right thing and such, but there are also enough people who live great lives without being religious"!]
Swami replied:- This is possible only in the case of a minority. The majority has the psychology of fear for God in doing sins. If you disturb the view of the majority, the entire society will be disturbed since it is impossible for the majority to become like a minority.
g. Someone says, ‘By being secular, you guarantee people to have the freedom to practice their religion without any fear.’ Please reply on it.
["Secularism means bringing impartiality to religion. The government doesn't have a bias towards any religion. It doesn't prohibit any religion either. But ensures religion has no basis on policy. It is the separation of religion from government. India diluted this principle heavily by adding religion into its laws - like the Hindu marriage act vs the Muslim marriage act. Or by making laws about what a religion is allowed or not allowed to practice (like conversion). By being secular, you actually guarantee that people have the freedom to practice their religion without any intervention or fear that a Muslim/Christian/Hindu leader will impact how they practice their religion".]
Swami replied:- You are always talking about a specific religion to which government shall not be attached. But, you are forgetting the other side of the coin, which is democracy i.e., ruling according to the opinion of majority of the public, which follows a specific religion. You are going forward with one eye, closing the other eye. I agree that every religion is established by God only and thus, equality of all the religions is the ultimate truth. You have to make all religions to realize this and then only the ultimate truth can be established to bring peace in the world. Before that stage, you have to follow the democracy. Moreover, what you criticize in India is not criticized in other countries in which other religions predominate the majority. Without realizing this, if you criticize only India and only Hinduism, the Indian Hindus will ask you the above questions. Your aim shall be to bring the realization of truth throughout the world simultaneously.
h. Someone says, ‘Do You want to stop Hindus from converting to other religions? Improve on casteism.’ Please reply on it.
["You want to stop Hindus from converting to other religions? Improve casteism. Don't turn a blind eye when a boy gets beaten to death because he ate food "with his betters" at a wedding he was invited to. Don't pardon rapists who victimize lower cast girls. Saying people are barred from converting is breaking India's fundamental constitutional right. Government has no business being religion based, if you want freedom of religion. Freedom of religion = Freedom of every religion. Not just hindu".]
Swami replied:- I want that none shall change his/her own religion and enter the other religion because single God exists in different external forms in various religions. In the light of such a concept, there is no meaning at all in the conversion of religion. Caste is only a specific section of people following a common profession with the help of corresponding suitable professional qualities. In any religion, sins like raping are severely prohibited and you shall not find fault with a specific religion in this context.
i. Someone says, ‘A spiritual person has absolutely no judgment on what others choose to follow.’ Please reply on it.
["Spirituality starts where Religion ends. One needs to really understand what Spirituality is though. A spiritual person has absolutely no judgment on what others may choose to follow or not follow. He himself may choose (or not choose) to follow a particular religion. He fully understands that it is his prerogative, just the way he understands that others have their prerogatives too".]
Swami replied:- Certainly, one has freedom to select any religion, but, the objection is that all religions have the same path of spirituality and conversion of own religion becomes meaningless in this context. Regarding the choice of doing an action or not, there cannot be freedom because there is a constitution based on which the judge gives the final approved way of doing a thing in a specific way.
j. Someone says, ‘Religion may be to do with God and at different level with pure beliefs and habits". Please reply on it.
["Belief gives people energy, tenacity, and steadfastness. It is the very element of a Religion without which a person may lose all motivation. Religion provides this crucial motivation. Having said that don't confuse Religion with Organized Religion. Religion, at one level may be to do with God, and at different level to do with pure beliefs and habits".]
Swami replied:- Whether you take a set of beliefs and habits or you take the same stuff in the name of a religion, finally it means one and the same. Why should you bother about a religion when the constitution is separately framed after examining the good and bad logically and based on which only the final judgement in any case is delivered. Under the present circumstances, your roaring on the religious beliefs is a waste like a mad lion roaring in the forest running in all sides. You can fight if the constitution is wrong and you need not fight against a religion based on which only the entire constitution is framed. In every country, the good sides of religion are taken and the bad sides are leftover in framing the legal constitution of the country. Your attitude is like to call a person whom you do not like as dog and then beat him.
k. Someone says, ‘Following religion is a poor man's need. Discussing religion is a rich man's weed’. Please reply on it.
Swami replied:- This is completely wrong. I don’t find any religion the scripture of which is written to favor the rich community of that religion. Jesus told that a camel may pass through the eye of a needle, but a rich person can never reach God.
l. Someone says, ‘Religious people perpetrate more crime in the world in the name of religion than atheist.’ Please reply on it.
["People who are ultra-religious feel they need to be moral for fear of God. Atheists feel they need to be moral because it is right. And the theist who is moral because of fear of God, feels permitted to be amoral when they feel it is permitted - like the mumbai riots, or godhra and rapes. Or the Christian crusades. Religious people perpetrate more crime in the world in the name of religion than any atheist. When there is no internal compass for morality, but only external (God), religious leaders can easily manipulate the masses into doing whatever they want people to do".]
Swami replied:- Atheist does every sin because he doesn’t fear for God regarding any punishment of any sin. The theist on the other hand fears to do at least some sins fearing the serious punishments of severe sins. For an atheist, all sins are of the same level because no sin carries any type of punishment.
m. Someone says, ‘Religions are large organizations - slower, go by doctrine, monopolization, having costs and benefits.’ Please reply on it.
["Religions are very large organizations, so the various forces of large organizations (like governments) come into play - they are slower, go more by doctrine, monopolization, cartel like behaviour not much space for a free market anymore. I am not talking about the faith aspect here, purely the organizational aspect. Also, things like caste, etc are their cost. Their benefits are belonging, hope, guidance, and many times monetary. Many times these benefits outweigh the cost".]
Swami replied:- The organizational defect stands for any organization whether it is religious or not religious. In such a case, how can you say that religious organization alone has defects?
n. Someone says, ‘The temple staff should focus less on rituals and more on the suffering and needy people.’ Please reply on it.
["For better or worse, Christian organizations are more modern and better organized. They have social programs that use fundraising to perform social activities, and use those activities for marketing and growth. Hindu organizations are more archaic. They use their funding to buy more ornaments, prettier/bigger/more expensive stuff for temples. And do more rituals that spend more money barring a few exceptions that do social programs. Further, it is complicated by exclusionary policies based on caste. So, they suffer for that. Hindu temples and organizations NEED to shape up. They need to be more active in the society and help the public. People should be able to go to their local temples and ask for food/scholarships/jobs. And the temple staff should focus less on mindless rituals and focus more on the people who are suffering and need help".
At Your divine lotus feet, Priyanka]
Swami replied:- Unless the theory of a religion spreads over, the social service by itself is not potential to be maintained on its own natural merits. If you say that feeding a beggar is good, impact of that concept always stands very weak forever as long as this creation exists. If you link this service to the grace of God, the impact of this service will be very deep in the minds of all kinds of people. Therefore, social service has better strength in view of theism and the same service becomes very weak and negligible in the light of atheism.
★ ★ ★ ★ ★