New Responses:
50. Dr. P. Madhu:
Dissents are rare events. Events surge forth surprisingly while it is not expected. Yet, it was brewing to surge without anyone noticing. Event is the moment in which insignificant and unobserved erupt and transfigure the state of affair.
Dissenting moments are evanescent and hence fast vanishing. They are the truth moments as a subject overcomes an untruth hitherto appeared as if it were truth. They are the moment of truth and the moments of subject as agent simultaneously. The truth of dissenting moments is the untruth dissented. In other words, truth is a break with the untruth- while it is the untruth is taken-for-granted misrecognitions that form the ordinary encyclopedia of knowledges.
Moments of truth are not moments of revelations, rather they are moments of active dissents, confrontations against the untruth taken for granted. However, such a confrontation does not happen until the evental eruptions opens up one to such a dissent, i.e., till one experiences crack with the state of the situation, the existing edifice of science/spirituality/morality - and works upon the ‘fidelity to the crack’.
The truth of the moment of Albert Einstein was the dissent with the then existing notions of time, space and energy. Truth of the moment is the dissent and not what is later consented. Truth is the commencement of a break from the ordinary and the encyclopaedia of knowledges linked to a situation.
Each of the dissents are commencements and not recommencements. Every dissent is a beginning. With consent, the dissent is co-opted and made into well named element in the set of the affairs. Dissents as truth moments that make holes in what is constituted as knowledge contrary to ‘unfolding’ into truth.
Moments of truth and fidelity to the truth cut off one or another untruth- and gradually the network of the untruth- passed on to the future. Truth thus stops time being made by series of untruths. Truth is an interruption on untruth being passed on and on. In other words, a truth is always the undoing of time. Truth is the unwinding of the untruth. Truth is always novel, as it is anti-knowledge. The Novelty begins with dissents.
Untruths are quite there in the set of things recognized as the set of things. Truth on the other hand is not recognizably present in the set of things, rather it is present as the void of the set, the null-set. The void is truth uncounted, unrecognized, unnamed yet to be recognized at the irruption of event by the beings capable of emerging into subjects.
Truth moments are moments in which one or another thick layer of misrecognition (untruth) is melted out due to the heat of the event erupted. These truth moments are moments of dissents in science, history and spirituality….
The history of science, history or spirituality are indeed the series of ruptures or dissents with the situation, however, the rupture is hardly historicized as they are treated as if they were a continuity constituting a historical whole. Series of such ruptures and dissents later presented as if they were continuities in scientific consents. Mutations are thus presented as if they were evolutions.
The spiritual dissents thus experienced at the moments of recognizing the untruth of taken for granted spirituality thus had its eruptions in unknown dissenting spiritualists who could dissent with till then existing untruths of consolidations in the social and historical fields of spiritualities. May be in such rare spiritual moments the dissenting spiritualities centered around the icon of Kali might have emerged.
It could be such a breakaway moments let Chattambi Swamigal and Sri Narayana Guru to recognize the untruth of brahminical social order and its justifying spiritual institutions of consent. Such spiritual dissents of truth moments are quite similar to the dissent experienced with the misrecognitions on space and time by Albert Einstein. The dissent with finity by Georg cantor, dissent with linear regularity in fractal geometry, the collapse of certainty in Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, etc., are indeed dissenting moments of awe similar to the spiritual dissents.
It could be such moments of dissents, the truth moments, could have let Buddha to recognize the fundamental ego-nullity. Also, it could be such an evental eruption let Mahavir to recognize infinite multiplicity and unnamability of everything.
Possibly, at such a truth moment of dissent, what was considered to be the unholiest of all, the human ash could have emerged holiest having place right in the forehead in the Saiva tradition. Among Aghoris the human ash is applied all over their body. Not just applying human ash all over the body, even the eating of rotten human flesh by Aghories could have started as a fidelity such a truth moment. These practices and rituals, which might have been started as the fidelity to the truth moment: the counting of the uncounted, the naming of the unnamed.
However, the fidelity in due course instead of sustaining the spirit of the radical truth moments, could have emerged as instruments of consent, the instruments of untruth- subjectivating subjects depriving their capability to emerge as subjects in fidelity to the crack in the ontology. The fidelity to the truth-moment, where by the unnamable is named, has its danger of unquestioned consent accompanying. The dissent of E=mc2 soon has become consent. Similarly, spiritual truth moments too later become consents losing their rigour, however still they are inbuilt with truth potential to dissent by the merit of their pure multiplicity. Break is always immanent to any situation because a situation is not what it is counted to be.
While dissent marks the truth moment, consent in all its forms are misrecognitions and hence settling of untruth. Dissents are always inbuilt as everything as all that exist are indeed pure multiples, infinitely different from how they are framed and counted. The uncounted and unnamed are unnoticed and thus they have greater potential to erupt uncontained. What is understood as spirituality thus is a multiple, infinitely different from how it is counted and framed and hence the notion is immensely potential to be dissented.
However, dissenting moments are rare. Consent is not rare at all. Always we are found to be sleepwalking into consents after consents. In this sleepwalking there is no truth moments; there is no subject. Every moment of dissent brings forth a till then unnamable thus facilitate them to be nameable, thus consent as the untruth is inbuilt in every dissent too.
----------------
49. Dr.R.C.SINHA
...Your stand regarding understandingthe dissident spirituality is fully backed by strong arguments.I will not contest your position at this juncture.I will simply point out that your contention that spiritual experience can't be expressed in language . I think it then lapses in mysticism and spirituality can 't be termed as mystical experience .You can say it subjective .
-----------------------------
48. K. H. Malavika:
...spiritual has somany meanings,,,,,individuals_
family_different families_villages_thaluks_districts_nations_world///////every where comes the presence of spirituality... but the base ...should be the family. ..there are families and familly members, and their relations ship should be spiritual, ....only then they can produce spiritually blessed children.
--------------------------------
47. Dr. M. Gangadharan:
A Note on Religion and Dissident Spirituality
Religions are cultural systems which decide in a general way the life-style of the believers. They are mostly institutionalised and provide support to the individuals of the religious community by inculcating self-confidence in them. Religious spirituality is generally expressed in prayers, pilgrimages and rituals sanctioned by religious texts and priests, or those well versed in the texts and traditions of the religion. Occasionally there will be some new philosophical interpretation of the basic texts of the religion which will expand its intellectual dimentions or re-form its ethical and moral precepts. But the religious orthodoxy built up by almost all religions are able to absorb the new ideas resulting from new interpretations of basic texts and re-formation of ethical and moral precepts. And they soon become part of the religious orthodoxy. The interpretation of vedic texts by Sankaracharya and the incorporation Neo Platonist ideas into Christian theology by Saint Augustine (354 - 430) may be taken as examples of new philosophical views on religious texts becoming part of religious orthodoxy in course of time.
Dissident spirituality is generally an expression of discontent with the orthodoxy of religions. Such discontent has been in India caused by social problems which the orthodoxy of religions failed to confront and solve. I can point out three cases in which dissidence was expressed spiritually and creatively in times of social change:
1. Thunchath Ezhuthachan, the poet of Kerala popularly considered the 'father of Malayalam language', though not literally true, is undoutedly the greatst poet in the language. His time has been variously reckoned by scholars and historians, as there is no clear indication of his time in his works. However, it may be safely assumed on the basis some literary evidence that he lived and wrote in the 16th century. Recent studies on the oceanic trade on the Malabar (Kerala) coast has found this period to be one of vigorous trade in spices. The arrival of the Portuguese on the Malabar coast did disrupt the trade for a short period due the ambition of the Portuguese to establish their monopoly in the trade in spices. But the trade revived soon and by the middle of 16th century the Portuguese had become part of the ongoing trade in spices. This in fact increased the volume of trade and made Malabar, especially regions near important harbours, prosperous. Ponnani, an harbour town to the south of Calicut, was one of the most important harbours in the Kingdom of the Zamorin. Nila (Bharata Puzha), one of the two longest rivers in Kerala, originates from the Western Ghats in the east and joins the Arabian Sea at Ponnani. This increased the value of Ponnani as a centre of oceanic trade in spices, as the spices were mostly grown in the high ranges and the long river provided a means of transporting them to the coast for export by maritime traders. Poonthanam Nambuthiri, a gifted poet of the second half of the 16th century, describes how "They earn lots of money/ Trading in jewels and gold/ In elephants and horses/ And by onstructing ships" . He also laments the moral decadence that accompanied the competition to make more and more money. But Ezhuthachan do not mention the condition of life of his time. Instead he translated the two great epics , 'Ramayana' and 'Mahabharata', into Malayalam poems of exceptional aesthetic quality with stress on sincere devotion to a God who knows everything and who is just and kind to everyone irrespective of caste and gender,.and who forgives anyone who repents sin committed in ignorance. These translations soon became very popular and began to be read ritually by all literate non-Brahmin communities. Ezhuthachn's works may be considered the creative expression of a kind of dissident spirituality as they did not conform to the dominant Brahmanic ethos which were totally influenced by the ideology of very rigid caste system. The great creative works of 17th and 18th century in Malayalam (by Unnayi Warriar, Kunchan Nambiar and Ramapurath Warriar) by non Brahmins as well as the emergence of art forms like Krishnanattom, Kathakali, Chavittu Natakam, etc., may be considered the consequence of Ezhuthachan's dissidence which opened up learning, literature and arts to non- Brahmins..
2. Mahatma Gandhi who dared to be different in his approach to religion may be considered to have opened up Hiduism through his dissident spirituality.
He declared himself to be a 'Sanathana Hindu'. But he never visited any temple and never cared to perform any of the rituals of orthodox Hinduism in his mature years. He always organised prayer meetings in which he discussed various social, political and spiritual problems. There were also songs at the prayer meetings in which the ideas of all religions were respectfully mentioned. Gandhi also insisted on eradication of untouchability among Hindus and worked for temple entry of all castes which was not allowed by the traditional Hinduism. His dissident practise of Hinduism may be considered as sanctioned by his spirituality. And this had impact on large number of Indians. In fact Hindu orthodoxy was effectively challenged by the transparent humanist position taken by Gandhi. The good relations between various religious and caste communities in India was made possible mainly through the break up of Hindu orthodoxy by Gandhi's spiritual dissidence.
3. Narayana Guru of Kerala (1856 - 1928), born in a family, considered to be of low caste at the time, in the southern part of the Princely State of Travancore received good education in Sanskrit and also training in Yoga from his early years. Though he was a devotee of a local temple for some time later he became an avadhootha and wandered in the hills and forests of southern Travancore. Finally he settled down at Aruvippuram, an hamlet on the banks of Neyyar river. Local people found him to be a wise guru in both religious and temporal matters. As the people who came to visit him increased he consecrated in February 1888 a Siva temple there without any of the traditional rituals related to such cosecration. When Brahmins questioned his authority to consecrate a diety he said it was only the Siva of Ezhavas thereby asserting that even those of the low caste has the right to worship Siva in their own way. He also built an ashrama near the temple and wrote on its wall the following verse:
'This is the model place where everyone
Shall live as brothers
without distinctions of caste or religion'.
This was an announcement in total contradiction of the norms and practices of the caste ridden Hindu society of those times. While living as an avadhuta Narayana Guru had composed a number of poems which explained the essence of advaita philosophy. He maintained that as all creation is the manifestation of the supreme being in various forms there is no fixed identity for anything in the world. His Atmopadesa Satakam' says: 'That which appears as oneself and the other are but the same Spirit that burns from the beginning'. This understanding of advaita was used to establish that there cannot be distinctions of caste or religion between human beings. His spirituality, clearly distinct from the Hindu orthodoxy of the times, was accepted by a large number of ordinary people and he began to be accepted as a Guru of great wisdom. This led to the formation of a society for the maintenance of the temple consecrated by him. This society was later (in 1903) constituted as Sree Narayana Dharma Paripalana Sanghom (S.N.D.P. Sanghom). Guru was assisted by the Sanghom to travel to all parts of Kerala to speak against meaningless and costly rituals of orthodoxy and to give more attention to learning and productive employment. He vehemently propagated against use of intoxicants which was draining the people of their energy. He advocated simple life dedicated to uplift of the poor and the downtrodden. The Sree Narayana Movement in course of time became very popular and brought about thorough change in life-styles of large number of people. Guru was accepted as the incarnation of a new spirit of humanism. This was the result of the recognition of Guru's dissident spirituality as genuine and humane.
Unfortunately in course of time Guru's teachings were used by some influential persons to create a separate identity for the Ezhava community. This was noticed by Guru in his later years and he even declared that he will have nothing to do with the S.N.D.P. Sanghom's attempts to consider one community to be better than other communities. However, it is a fact that Sree Narayana Movement started the process of community formation in Kerala. The sub-castes in different caste groups collapsed to form one community.
----------------------------
46. Dr. R. C. Sinhna:
Thanks a lot for forwarding the different responses relating to your project on dissident spirituality.This is quite interesting and you have given sound reasonigs in favour of your stand.Pl accept my congratulations for inviting so many comments .Spiritual experience is not like Aprokshaanubhuti or something trancendenta l.Your dissident note is appropriate to mystical or other worldy spiritual experience .But if a labourer gets plesure in in his work and calls it a sort of spiritual experience or a teacher gets a kind of pleasant experince in teaching or a dancer gets a sort of spiritual feelings in dancing and feels a kind of spiritual ecastatic experience.For a lorry driver driving his lorry and earnig livelihood is a sort of spirituality.
-----------
45. Dr. Ajay Sekhar:
["The Politics of Spirituality: The Dissident Spiritual Practice of Poykayil Appachan and the shared legacy of Kerala Renaissance"]
The paper tries to contextualize the dissident spiritual practice of Appachan in the cultural contexts of Kerala renaissance. It links his life and works with that of Vaikundha Swamy and Narayana Guru. The paper also tries to establish epistemological and politicalconnections between various dissident spiritual protest movements in Kerala and India including Jain, Buddhist, Ajivaka and Sufi traditions.Spiritual dissidence is seen as an expression of social protest and ethical resistance against hegemonic and fascist forms of dominantspirituality that enslaved the people through religious spirituality and extended the reign of caste and Brahmanism. The anti caste and anti Brahmanic thrust in the dissident and minor spiritual traditions of India are contextually linked and defended by the attempt. The social, ethical and political dynamism and complexity of dissident spirituality in Kerala and India are explored and signified in the brief text.
---------------------
44. Ishwar Dost:
... For me dissidence and spirituality are two separate, irreducible to each-other, yet inter-connected and overlapping domains. Both have their own conceptual and social history. Both have been related to religion, politics, knowledge, and arts.
Yes we can conceptualise spirituality in terms of dissident and protest (Giri) and at the same time we can conceptualise dissident and protest in terms of spirituality. And then, we can conceptualise both in terms of counter-power, transcendence and sublime. But beyond this conceptual exercise is the question that what the differences between these terms are? Are these merely terms or also distinct social practices? How we can distinguish between spiritual and non-spiritual dissident and also between dissenting and non-dissenting spirituality? How we can identify interconnections of these processes?
Can we invoke here Dayakrishna’s distinction between Atman-centric (historical specificity of Indian society) and socio-centric paths of transcendence or change?
How can we understand unspeakablity of spirituality? (we can compare it with ‘subalterns cannot speak’) Is it ‘Mukhar maun’ or an articulated silence? Or it is an escape from reality? In a broader sense escape may also be a form of registering dissent.
The theme note capture beautifully both the aspects: Existence of the spiritual quest in society and then sociology of practice of spirituality and its seekers. The quite similar process is there for other forms of transcendence such as literature, music, arts, meditation. Every transcending attempt has its own sociology.
I found Madhu’s interventions interesting and provoking. If spirituality is nothing but unsettling dissent (comment 29) then, dissident spirituality be a tautology. However, Madhu’s contention is valid that history privileges consent and a constant process of negotiation between consent and dissent goes on, through which dissent is absorbed in new power relations. In fact, power of consent is such that it can function even in the garb of a dissent.
Madhu said that religion is ideological in Marxian sense. But Marx also referred to religion as ‘soul of soulless conditions’ and the ‘heart of a heartless world’. Moreover, Ideology, for Marx, is processual, functional and contextual, where one progressive or emancipatory idea of the past may altered into regressive or repressive idea.
Madhu’s earlier treatment of consent and dissent itself suggests that ideology and critique are not binary and are not immune to each-other. It suggests that same ideational or experiential source may be ideological or critical in given context. This Marxian notion explains that why at some historical juncture religious leaders (like sahajanand saraswati of Bihar, who was also a Kisan Sabha leader, or Phule) or resources are mobilised for active political change.
Why spirituality is not ‘historical’ or ‘ideological’? Madhu defined spirituality as an act of ‘transcending the gutter of power’. Here spirituality simply becomes anti-power. Why we are concentrating too much on (sublime) idea/ image/ essence/ spirit of spirituality. The question is how can we conceptualise spirituality in terms of practice, action and praxis? In practice, we may not find neat categories.
Madhu is right that religion de-spiritualises. But so every organised form do the same thing, may be it is science, university, party. I think we need a more complex understanding of religion and spirituality and dissenting aspect of religion before taking side of non-religious or spontaneous spirituality.
-----------
43. Fr. Dr. George Joseph:
[TRIBAL COSMOLOGY – A Dissident stream in spirituality.]
The tribal societies of India have a proud possession of a great and unique tradition and culture. As the carriers of the early civilization there is a very close similarity in the ways and visions of their life. The remarkable relation of Human being with God, Fellow being and Nature and the mutual interdependence prevailing among them can be considered as the basic foundation their philosophical vision of Universes. ‘Nothing alone exits but only as a sequence of the other and we the humans are one and all creatures is one’. This vision paves for the basis of tribal life.
Spirituality is a way of seeing, a way of feeling and a way of relating to the reality: the Nature, the Human and the Divine. It is an attitude and a relationship between these three principles. The tribes believe that this Universe is the creation of God and all are parts of the Divine Force. Hence the Universe is divine and we are all related to one another. A close examination of the myths, festivals and folklore, one can clearly fathom the depth of their awareness of the Cosmos. Here I take an effort to go deep in to their spirituality by studying the ways of life of a few tribal groups of the North and South India.
The main stream society holds a negative notion about tribal religion and spirituality. They consider it as one of animistic, pantheistic and superstitious in nature. It is a wrong understanding of tribal religion and spirituality. The researcher’s experience, observations and understanding of tribal spirituality proves the contrary. It is a dissident stream in spirituality. The main stream society needs a new vision and openness to understand the rationality of tribal spirituality.
-------------------
42. Dr. T. Mini:
creativity of spirituality is a domain that is to be explored. I think the social reformation movements of 19th and 20th centuries had made use of Spirituality to create a new life style and new society.But their success in this field was lasting only for a small period.Religious reforms were the result of such movements.But we can now understand that religious practices and beliefs are over powering the spiritual content.Spirituality is to be viewed seprated from religion It is to be looked upon with the ideals of tolerance, equality,etc.
---------------------
41. S M Mishra:
the idea and idiom "dissident"spirituality,its quite and genuinely workable.सम्प्रदाय-वृद्धिः अनेन सम्भवति /
I submit : Is there not a dissident in Shankara who stands away from Shankara and his unimpeachable philosophical logic while it comes to esoteric practices of spirituality ?
-----------------------------
40. Alexander Gruber:
Here is some survey of my dreams philosophy. I have written this as you inspired me by your question about my dreams philosophy. It is a short hand approach to my views.
ABOUT DREAMS SPIRITUALITY
I like to explain here, what can be called the prescripts, rules or principles I am follwing in my dreams
interpretation. These are the rules for my dreams spirituality. These are the basics of my
spirituality or religion (if God is identifyed with the unconscious spirit) or of my psychology,
if the term "God" is replaced always by the term "unconscious spirit".
1. pro-contra-nodream.
If I have a pro-dream to a certain question or undertatking, I will usually do this.
If I have a contra-dream, I will usually let it be. And if I have no dream,
I will usually think that I can do, what I want.
2. truth is emerging.
The unconscious spirit teaches the human being in three steps to understand its capacities
of knowing the future.
a) It shows that it knows something of the future.
b) It shows that it does not know all of the future.
c) It makes its follower to understand that it does not simply show the future,
but truth (as well in the Eastern as in the Western sense) is emerging from the
interaction of the dreamer with the unconscious spirit.
3. Orientation and information.
Thus the unconcious spirit provides information (truth in the Western sense)
as well as orientation in life skills (truth in the Eastern sense)
4. Man proposes, God disposes (Mahatma Gandhi).
The unconscious spirit intends a strong human being. Man can make the proposals
(seek the undertaking, put up the questions) and the unconscious spirit reacts and juges
upon it. But sometimes it is even the other way arround, the unconscious spirit proposes
and the human being is to dispose hers or his capacities accordingly.
5. The realm of God is inside of you (Lew Tolstoi).
What in the old religions is called God is in my spirituality the unconscious spirit,
the source of dreams and visions (as intuitions). The unconscious spirit is the only
existing independent counterpart of man. It is the only instance, which could be called rightly a god.
6. The archetype of the devil means the great critizist.
The devil occupies the critical position in the set of archetyps. He is not the great liar, whichreligions only put
up to have an enemy.
7. The archetype of the fish means the bringer of culture on historical level.
While the hare is the bringer of culture on domestic (house, family) level,
the fish occupies this function on historical level.
8. The mandala archetype denotes the harmony aspect of the unconscious spirit.
It denotes the fourfoldness of the functions of perception or recognition, as are:
Intellect, Intuition, feelings and senses. The integration of these four functions provides
for harmony of the sould. And thus the mandala in a wider sense denotes, intends, is
harmony.
------------------------------------
39. Dr. Jose George:
Theatricality of Spiritual Performance
Theatre techniques are widely used by spiritual business men/women performers of various religions for popular appeal. Conventional belief that spiritual exercises are for the “divinization” of the soul is changed in the post modern performance space. As a result spiritual performances become performative events especially in the popular and virtual space. Popularization of the e-religion and visual media accelerated this transformation. Charismatic mode of performance, appearance and blessing ceremonies of the godmen/women,etc. are marked in the rhetoric of popular festivals or carnivals rather than a spiritual activity. The paradigm shift happened in the spiritual performance space is explored in this paper.
-------------------
38. Giorgio De Martino:
May be we are a bit confused about the word "spirituality"? Observing myself, using my experiences as anthropological field, obviously my body too - and quite far from the interesting elaborations, for example, by Fritjof Capra - far, also, from some easy revised sightseeing on Yoga & Co., may be we need some other and/or new conceptualization of "spiritual"? Now involved in some neuroscience studies, I have began to think about all this in terms of bioliving matter mirroring and speaking with her/his-self, being my own inner monologue as seen like a flesh brain-computer interface. I am the best laptop in the universe and a self-generated algorithm? Joking with the sci-fi suggestion (but "matter" come from the Latin Mater...) could be a trick, but can also be a way to think different without forgetting that we are living in a strange era. An engaged spiritual dissident would like to speak fluently and different with some living flesh-matter that has a dialogue with a burning Planet? Does this living matter-planet has anything to do with the so-called "body-mind" problem?
Horsing a new millennium we risk to see a humanity that seems more like a dangerous mycosis sparkling around the solar system, roaring satisfied to destroy other worlds as it's happening to this planet, in the meantime we can communicate so easily and at a fast speed, as I am doing now from the Internet Point in Kannur. A spiritual dissident, it seems, can be only a kind of unhortodox and/or heretic figure? Does an experienced Theyyam performer think on some further evolution of the recent explained Poincare's Conjecture demonstrated by Grisha Perelman, besides the immediate act of being there dancing with/as a God?
So many times we have seen someone proposing himself as "spiritual", being more involved in selling-buying business than something "spiritual": I don't remember any priest, during my childhood or when I was a teenager that I could take seriously involved in what they were trying to make us believing. Yes, I am 53, and I grew-up between the 60s and 70s, an astonishing period, in Europe, I spent something like 5 plus 5 years in priests' schools, no, any spirituality, there. Obliged to become "dissident", I still remember what happened when, aged 12, the priest-professor asked to make a commentary on a S. Francesco d'Assisi poem, I told that some ideas remembered me what I heard about Marx's theories. A hot situation, I was lucky, I was not living during the witches hunting!
------------------------
37. Parnab Mukherjee:
UNBOUND - A PERFORMANCE PROJECT ON MAHATMA GANDHI'S HIND SWARAJ
100 years after Hind Swaraj's publication it is dangerously relevant. As relevant as ever. More real than reality television. Especially at a time when misplaced ambitions and even more misplaced notions development are so rampant that we have lost our rights-based core. That the undercurrent of constructive dissidence has almost disappeared from our notions of spirituality. He argues that did we ever have one?.....
One hundred years of a seminal work. When Hind Swaraj was first published many raised eyebrows. Many believed that here was a pamphlet of anarchy. A century later, Hind Swaraj still answers many questions especially the disturbing one: Who or what makes a role model? For that matter can the state be a role model? Role model in a is never the figurehead it is always an idea. And what a matter is not who did what instead who changed what?
It can be a change in the mindset. It can be a change in the way of national, local or even neighborhood thinking. It can be bringing/introducing/re-introducing changes that make a tangible difference. Yes, the idea is defined by age but not merely the biological age. As Gandhiji says in Hind Swaraj that it is ultimately the soul force, which is the core.
This force has to be defined by the newness of thinking, the ability to dare and to look the odds into the eye. A change-maker can be a theatre director, sportsman, a peacenik, a labourer, a human rights activist, a sportsman, a painter, a lawyer, a bunch of activists or even a group or collective that gives birth to an idea who's time has come or which is far ahead of times. But the change maker has to be in active change and not some passive theoretical change that is chained by academic pedagogy.
Idea is not something you paste on the walls. You do that for heroes or superstars, the landscape of ideas are a little different. So, it is a tragedy that a Bob Marley ends up more being in the T-shirt rather in the protestscape. Any activist wants activism to be cool but with a philosophical core. We mixed up this manufactured aura coolness as being fashionably trendy. The cultural voyeurs that turned the Swaraj into a marketable commodity than as a light in such noxious times
-------------------
36. Swami.Vyasa Prasad
In the West, philosophers have often disagreed with their teachers
from the time of Plato and Aristotle. In India we see disagreement
between the followers of Sankara and Ramanuja, even though they quote
the same sources. In the Indian traditional context, vertical
hierarchical "paramparas" are responsible for transmitting the wisdom
of their teachers from generation to generation. Dissent in this
context is the same as "disadoption" when a student disagrees with his
or her teacher leading to a mutual breakdown of trust.
While disadoption leads to double-loss, we have instances in the
Upanisads where dissent is effective as a form of a protest against
crystalized and irrelevant theories and practice. In these cases
truth, "sat" breaks free from the confining morbidity of "asat"
untruth. A chant from the Brhadaranyaka Upanisad "asatoma sat
gamaya" is a supplication, "From untruth lead us to truth". In the
Katha Upanisad we have the example of young Naciketas dissenting from
participating in his father's ritual because the young boy notices his
father's insincerity and compromise in carrying out the requirements
of the ritual.
The Bhagavad Gita, Chapter 2, Verses 41-46, dissents from Vedic
practices and advises its votaries to abandon the relativisitic way
of the Vedas. Here we find the beginnings of the movement against (or
beyond) the limited and conditioned way of ritualistic spirituality
towards the more open, dynamic and universal values of the Upanisads.
The Protestant movement in Christianity began with the dissent of
Martin Luther. These are but a few examples of dissent being a
powerful and useful method to break through hardened and exploitive
tendencies that invariably afflict spiritual traditions in the course
of time. Dissent here becomes vital for the progress and
development of spiritual understanding. This has similarities to
Hegelian dialectics of thesis and antithesis leading to synthesis.
--------------------
35. Sudha Reddy:
It is by being in the midst of the marginalized communities I have understood the essence of spirituality, beyond concepts. This essence is revealed to oneself when the perennial values, become part of day-to-day life.
I discovered that these perennial values are nothing but spiritual values when justice, equanimity, patience, responsibility are integrated into compassion, generosity, sharing, love.. There is much more depth to spirituality, and it is by living close to the simple people and their existential difficulties, with their traditional spiritual wisdom helping them to cope, to share and resolve these hardships, that we can discover it, live it and understand it from inside.
In the present complex religious, socio political environment, the spiritual conscience has responsibility to encompass transformative process horizontally too, which means preparedness for responsible confrontation in terms of restoring justice, dignity and harmonious interconnectedness of human and nature. To me, it is compassionate confrontation for just and peaceful inter existence. It is not a dissent stream in spirituality; rather it is original stream in which all living beings harmoniously follow the flow.
Do we consider the stream, which has dramatically gained an irretrievable momentum during the recent centuries - a “man-made” unnatural and offensive stream, prompted by domination and greed, disharmony and hatred, encroaching and invading every parcel of the first original stream?
Books and religious leaders (spiritual leaders are rare) can teach us tremendously, but there is something in me now knows that feminine wisdom, encompassing compassion, innate healing nature, and responsible confrontation for justice form its own indigenous tradition of what takes to create and sustain life.
-------------------------
34. Argo Spier:
.....I was rather occupied with some 7 operas in 8 days (in 4 cities in Germany). ....This one was very lovely and used an old Greek myth ... of a woman turning into a tree, escaping the advances of her suitor ... who 'explained' everything. This brings us to 'dissidence' ... and the scientific study of it. The concept dissidence - isn't it also an elusive one? Describing it a destruction of it? And I am now thinking about how it is only the non-dissident that has access to it. The dissident doesn't know he is 'dissident'. It’s like throwing a stone ... the stoniness of the stone goes with the stone. And you don't have it in your hand anymore. Once you have tossed away the stone (which had stoniness when it was in your hand) you have nothing in your hand, not a stone, not its description, just plain nothing. I have gone through the program you have devised and I find it a thorough work document and you are complicated with all the work you have put into it this far. Congratulations! I am learning a lot of the high standards that seem to be the norm in Kaledy. I wish you and the participants a fruitful conference - and when a 'definition' of dissidence would be developed that lay bare a fact that there isn't 'such a thing' as dissident religious activity, then the discovery of dissidence, its 'stoniness' will be there where the stone is ... not in your hand, but away from it.
----------------------
33. Giorgio De Martino
....I saw the movie "Avatar": (B)oollywood style but not so bad: we all know how does it means and as I can see Mother Earth is preparing some surprise for the stupid mycosis that has developed on her beautiful skin... this could be some subject on our argument on "spiritual dissidence". Rebuilding new meaning on an old word and for a new world: not the "show-biz New World Order" that seems more a revised edition of the bypassed "Third Reich".
--------------------------
32. Vinaya Chaitanya:
I am happy to see newer responses, esp. the ones trying to bring it into some relation to daily life, I have been around drop-outs who question deeply, through their own lives, the 'givens' of societies, and there is a lot more open and creative exchanges happening around us; dissent is part of growth, like when the chick breaks out of the shell. ...also glad to see the response of Dr. Janaky.... it certainly contains thoughts that were there even in my first response.
I wish there were more sharing on the question of woman-man relationships, in the context of spirituality; spirituality or the pursuit of the self, in relation to the non-self, must mean that understanding the woman is the most important (spiritual) attainment for the man and vice-versa. Of course this is full of problems and therefore usually taboo, but honestly, almost all our problems can be traced to a lack of understanding/communication between woman and man. And this is esp. evident in kerala, in spite of the 'progress' we have made in many realms like literacy etc.
The relationship between literacy and patriarchy has been the subject of many interesting studies, esp. in the west. Also the two halves of the brain and their complementary functions should be relevant to the discussion.
----------------
31. Prof. A Kanthamani. [comment on the 'scheme for workshop-discussion']
1. There is a need to justify the equivocation between religion/spirituality and non-religious/non-spritual (ethical, social, political, aesthetical or scientific?) so as to further justify that there is no 'demarcation' between them if it is expected to entail no demarcation between 'social justice' and spiritual justice. Both are assumed to be viable 'intellectual domains of human engagement'. Pluralism is not entailed by dissent and vice versa (dissent is not entailed by pluralism). Similarly, cultures are diverse and they do not dissent each other. Or nationality, race, clan, ethinicity, tribe, caste, language do not 'dissent' from one another; rather they differ from one another. What follows from this is that it (i.e.'there exists the phenomenon of spiritual dissent'/ there are dissident streams of spirituality )becomes a contested site. They are not to be considered as 'historical facts' as you claim to be. The question is creativity may not be linked together with the above. So the initial assumption should be differential manifestations of religion/ spirituality, that is, pluralism and the ways they could be linked to science, however thin the link might be.
2. So you start with a more adequate definition of dissident streams (1). There is a need to demonstrate its 'factual' or 'historical' basis by citing examples (2). Or, religion/subsects, spiritualism/subsects, primitive and more evolved form (3), sometimes differentiating into personal types (4).
3. The enquiry begins with an open mind without bringing in any oppressed or power relations or ideology (5).
4. An objective assessment without necessarily linking with mystical or religious practice of elevating states of mind (6).
5. The relation between social justice and spiritual justice is to be demonstrated.
6. Finally, support your theme with adequate textual sources (11).
--------------------
30. Dr.Janaky:
It is very interesting to note the intersections between feminism and buddhism worked out specifically by black zen feminists like Alice Walker and Bell Hooks.Zen spirituality has enabled the black feminists to transcend the emotional and intellectual limitations of white feminist theory to understand the affective importance of the 'ordinary' in human life.Its regenerative potential ,so says bell hooks.what was called houusehold drudgery by the white feminist s is being revalued by alice walker and many others as alternative seats of creativity and connections with the divine.i can well imagine doubts being raised by many feminists as to whether this is not a romanticising of womens labour which has always been the tool of exploitation too!
think it will be interesting to look at the ways in which different forms of Buddhist social engagement have transformed the emotional world of feminism from one of anger competition and combative mentality nurtured as it was within a capitalist patriarchys academic and social space, into one of non-competitive ethos based on care love and sharing.
making the every day ordinary personal domestic spaces sacred once again isnt it also a way of practising dissident noninstitutuionalised spirituality?
---------------------
29. Dr. P. Madhu:
Dissents, I believe, has more of a truth potential than consents. History, at every point of its turn has both dissent and consent, however, consent has historical representation and thus the dissenting spirit is often overlooked by history and historical discourse. Everything represented becomes part of consent than that of dissent. Thus, even dissident spirituality historically becomes another discourse of consent. Dissent to be sharpened, it should resist every attempt to consensus, settlement and representations- because all that is represented hides the spirit of dissent. In my vocabulary, such an unsettling dissent is spirituality. Everything that got settled, represented,.... are anti- spiritual....
However, the religious consensus, its conformity, its being embedded with the untruth of statuesque, its tactics, social forms of co-options that emerge from religious identities, the apparently dissenting resistance themselves becoming part of another consensus etc., deserves elaborate discussion. In other words the historically emergent spiritual forms and their untruth condition deserves discussion.
--------------------------
28. Dr. M. Gangadharan,
in Kerala spirituality appears to have been totally submerged in rituals of mainstream religions and 'isms' like Marxism, communism and a kind of politicised nationalism. Narayana Guru's dissident Advaita, Sufism which was initially responsible for the spread of Islam in Kerala and which inspired writers like Vaikom Md. Basheer, and dissident (humane) Christianity advocated by people like late Father Kappen have been swept aside by the consumerist modernity of Kerala. And this appears to have drained Keralites of all culture and creativity. I dont know whether discussions will help in any kind of spiritual revival in Kerala. But that is the only way academics can work for a change.
---------------------------
27. T. Sri Rama Chandra Murthy
How to define spirituality? Spirituality can be defined as a state of inquiry about the fundamental aspect of the life of one’s mind bereft of mundane outlook. This may not be a perfect definition, but suffice it to say that in spirituality there is continuum of one’s idea on the life of the mind. The definition may or may not bar `other minds.’ But it does rule out any room for activity in regard to the development of the idea till such as time as it is not concretized. Even after the idea is consolidated, it should evoke only affirmative action. For, if there is any negative reaction, it is not spiritual in the first place. So, spirituality is ever in transition in regard to the fundamental questions confronting the mind of mankind. That is spirituality is open. Once the result of spirituality is stated, revealed or expressed, it is to that extent closed, pending further inquiry till the ultimate/absolute is reached, if at all, through the means of experimental science. To amplify, spirituality is transcendental thought that is open-ended only. In this sense, spirituality may make philosophical realism possible. That is, the spiritual quest of other minds as well as the Universe can be understood. This understanding can take in its stride `the dissident streams in spirituality’ for a synthesis. Therefore, the theme, “Understanding the dissident streams in spirituality,” is an analysis of spiritual issues that have been `closed’ for further elaboration…..
-----------------------
26. Prof.Shiva Bhanu Singh:
…. we are living in a world where the differences in opinion ,in thought, in life style and religious and cultural beliefs is not rejected or marginalised or hated but it is a matter of appreciation. it is very natural to have differences in the area of spirituality also, because ther are different stages of spiritual develpopment. Some persons who are pursuing and following spiritual practces for their upliftment are standing at different levels of spiritual path. some have attained more success in their pursuit due to their strong commitment and total involvement whereas some are not so devoted and committed therefore there will naturally be differences in their spiritual experiences.we can see that in different religions different seers , saints and mystics have claimed to realiztrue nature of ultimate reality but they have different versions of their spiritual and religious faith. one shuld not and one can not negate the clims of these seers outright on rational and logical or scientific grouns because it will be like committing category mistake. therfore I humbly propose the philosophers and debaters to develop brod-mindedness and cultivate a tendency to respect the views and experiences of opponents views too without any prejudice or biased approach.
---------------------------------------
25. Dr. Surya Kanta Maharana
The oldest religious sentiment ever expresses by mankind may perhaps be the statement on religious harmony in the ancient Vedas: “Truth is One; sages call It by various names.” (ekam sat viprah bahudha vadanti). The same sentiment has been echoed and reechoed by enlightened persons of different religions in different parts of the world. The Roman thinker Quintus Aurelius Symmachus has declared, “The heart of so great a mystery cannot ever be reached by following one road only.” Apuleius, a Platonic philosopher of 200 A.D., had the firm conviction that the Divine “is adored throughout the world in divers manners, in variable customs, and by many names.” Though the truth of religious harmony has been affirmed and proclaimed by the enlightened few in every generation, humanity as a whole has not yet come to terms with it. In today’s world, religious differences still rankle and continue to produce disharmony, misunderstanding, and mutual distrust. Questions arise: How do we deal with all these differences? Would these vanish in due course of time or are they here to stay? Are they in any way reconcilable? Is it possible to discover some thread of harmony connecting them? What is the significance of the presence of so many religious traditions in the history of the world? Such are the questions that every serious student of religion has to reckon with. …The problem of evil occupies a crucial position in every system of philosophy or religion, a problem that is usually explained away instead of itself being explained; and the difficulty of reconciling the conception of a God who is all good with the existence of evil remains. Monists of the West, in order to be consistent with their philosophy of absolutism, tend to deny the reality of evil; for, they declare, what we call evil is evil only because we do not view our lives sub specie eternitatis. What appears to be evil is in reality good when viewed in this manner. And yet we must ask: Can evil really be changed into good merely by viewing it in a special manner? Can pain be labeled pleasure provided we view it absolutely? It is true that pain may be borne gracefully if we fix our gaze upon the ultimate goodness of God, but pain is a positive experience of suffering, at least during the duration of the experience. How then can a philosophy be at one with itself simply by denying evil or even more simply by affirming that it can be transformed into good when it is viewed “under the aspect of eternity”? The question remains unanswered in Western attempts to dodge this gravest of all ethical problems. …. In the sixteenth and seventeenth century A.D., the West hit upon a new way of knowing. We call it the scientific method, and it quickly replaced revelation, its predecessor, as the royal road to knowledge. Conceptually, it spawned the scientific worldview, and its technology created the modern world. The citizens of these physical and conceptual environments constitute a new human breed whose beliefs correspond to very little in the heritage of their forebears. As a consequence, religion-the kingpin of that heritage-has been marginalized, both intellectually and politically. First, politically. Fresh continents to occupy and easier travel have introduced a new phenomenon into history: cultural pluralism. The result has been to edge religion from public life, for religion divides whereas politics seeks unity. Concurrently, religion has been marginalized intellectually. Science has no place for revelations a source of knowledge, and as moderns tend to think with science on matters of truth, confidence in revelation has declined. Marx considered religion “the opiate of the people”, “the sob of an oppressed humanity”, and Sigmund Freud saw it as a symptom of immaturity. Children who cannot accept the limitations of their actual parents dream up Fathers in Heaven who are free of those limitations. Theism is wish fulfillment - a pandering to “the oldest, strongest and most urgent wishes of mankind”- and the religious experience (“the oceanic felling”) is regression to the womb. For religion to be marginalized socially and forced to the wall intellectually is no small event. Some see it as substantial enough to warrant the pronouncement *that God has died. Sociologists compile statistics on the change, but for the intellectual historian two developments suffice. First, on the question of God’s existence the burden of proof has shifted to the theist, and as proofs of the supernatural are difficult in any case, the classic proofs for God’s experience have pretty much collapsed. The second sign, though, is more telling. Whereas atheists and theists used to agree that God’s existence is an important issue, now even that common ground has vanished. The tension between belief and disbelief has slackened. “It leaves no mark on intellectuals now”, a cultural historian has observed, adding: “We have witnessed a decline in the urgency of the debate.” The atheism of indifference or apathy simply refused to take the questions of God seriously. The question emerges: How, in the face of these seemingly irrefutable signs of faith’s decline - “its melancholy, long withdrawing roar” in Matthew Arnold’s memorable phase - is it possible to argue that the future of religion is promising?
--------------------
24. Prof. A. Kanthamani
Responses grow and multiply but there is no guarantee that they 'swamp' the official theme. My friend Dr Giri swamps it and loads to read 'dissident streams' as 'spiritual strivings' that struggle to reach higher levels and even to 'confront' 'indignity' and 'injustice' and thereby they 'go beyond', while for Swami Prasad, the dichotomy between spirituality and religion is such that religion 'believes' and spirituality 'dissents'. Both take some facet of the term 'dissident streams'. The official term loads 'spirituality' with 'dissent', and when unloaded it means nothing but different streams of spirituality (Pluralism). As such they cannot exercise 'dissent' and they might utmost 'differentiate' and thus all religions are concordant because they have the same ideals of 'good life'. No two religions generate 'discord'. 'Dissent' is an open exercise of reason and there is no necessity for them to dissent, in this sense, and so, even the term 'clash' looks hackneyed. In what sense then, it becomes an 'analytical tool'? The theme note admits that such differentiation must be examined in terms of 'non-religious' or 'non-spiritual' 'entity' (the term is repeated at least twice; obviously there is not much of a dichotomy between religion and spirituality here). So, religion is examined in the backdrop of something anew that is to be imported here. It does not spell out 'which'. Maybe it faintly echoes Foucault: knowledge has power-relations; applied to religion, religious pluralism is determined by some invisible hand of power. Construed thus, what new agenda it has is not clear. Religious practices precipitate to the lowest individual need. Every individual may have his own reigning god (every sect has a sub-sect ad leads on to the lowest stratum). The question here: how do you introduce the analogy to power-relations in this context. Assuming that every personal god is determined by some such invisible power-relation, how does it contribute to the 'naturalistic' understanding of religious pluralism (I assume that religion also must be studied as a natural phenomenon). Supposing that Hinduism/Islam/Christianity is determined by certain power-relation, where this will lead us into: is it: all religions dissent because there is a conflict in power-relation. That would be just a tautology!
--------------------------------------------
23. A.V.G.Warrier:
While going through Eitereya Upanishad I came across the original leftist. Mr Vamadeva, who remembers the three biriths of Brahman while indulging in the ways of the world. He doesn't see dissidence but the splendor of multifarious manifestations and the immense opportunities to make life a pilgrimage. Modern day leftism by focussing on dissidence misses the picture altogether. No wonder the slogans are loud. Hysteria is at the highest pitch when the blind is trying to lead the blind.
----------------------------------------
22. M. Parameswaran:
"Dissent spirituality" is inescapable for any religion and for any individual (if we go through the History of Religion, we get enough proof for this). If we go by the law of polarity and accept that it rules every aspect of our life, we will understand without any dispute that dissent is inescapable for any spiritual pursuit.
The topic compels me to draw a parallel from the Derridian perspective of the constant struggle between the 'centre' and the 'periphery' or from the Advaita Vedanta perspective of moving away from the 'imposed' duality (in which we are rooted strongly) towards 'one-ness'. By the very fact that we accept the problem of 'duality', we accept the struggle implied in the perpetual dissent involved in the path of spirituality.
The pertinent question here would be, in my humble opinion, 'dissent from what'? 'dissent from which kind of spirituality'? 'in which context (sociological, philosophical, psychological etc.) Is this sought as a 'virtue' (axiological perspective) or as a need of the societal values, as in the case of Sufism, Siddha Philosophy, Protestants, etc.
------------------------------
21. Dr. Ananta Kumar Giri.
....yes it is important to realize spirituality as dissidence and protest. We need to understand the luminous anger and rage at work in spiritual strivings and struggle. We also need to understand spirituality as confrontative, confronting structures of indignity and injustice. In my presentation I wish to explore present a paper entitled, Practical Spirituality as Luminous Anger: Compassion, Confrontation and Beyond
----------------------------------
20. Swami Vyasa Prasad:
.....I see a problem when discussing
spirituality and religion together. Spirit, being of the nature of an essence, is by its own nature a unitive principle. We use terms such as "all pervading, eternal, infinite, beyond duality, Unmoved Mover," among others to describe spirit. Religion on the other hand, derived
from the Latin root "religare" from "ligare" to bind, having the same root "lig" as in 'ligament', gives us the notion of "binding". This "bondage" can be enforced by tradition, ritual, unquestionable customs. Just because our ancestors followed this path, or this is
how it always was, can be terms used to justify religion. Spirit, on the other hand, is always characterized by freedom. A freedom to interpret the fundamental questions of life in a fresh
manner, a freedom to express one's innate disposition without fear of being chastised.
We can generalize by saying that spirituality is for the bold, while religion is for the believer. One flows like a river, blows like the wind, with the spontaneity of a child, while the other is rigid,
frozen, and predictable. Every child is very spiritual, but can end up bound to ideologies and hemmed in by the voice of hardened tradition. It takes courage to be spiritual, while it is easier to take refuge in the comfort of crowds by suspending one's critical understanding.
Kierkegaard said that the crowd is always wrong. There is a Plotinian flight of the alone to the Alone for the seeker. We also make a distinction between people who have mystical experiences, who are few and far between, appearing once in a millennium, and their followers
who do not have the experience, but adhere to their faith. If we consider the value of peace, a person can experience peace in a sanctum, be it a Sufi shrine, an ancient temple or a medieval cathedral. There is peace in the forest, on certain mountain tops. There is peace when
one shuts one's eyes and turns the gaze inwards. Spirituality is about peace - a peace that surpasses understanding. In a state of peace the understanding of a person is very different than in a condition of confrontation. Perhaps a feature of modern religions is the lack of peace. Religion
is loosing its mooring with spirituality and flirting with activism. This can be seen in the larger context of globalization, the neoliberal economy, and the ideal of democracy and secularism now
supporting corporations and the profit motive. Religion condones profit and justifies reward and punishment. It is ok to think of us and them, the chosen and the dammed.
Spirituality treats all beings as equal, but in a different way than democracy. In the spiritual context, the pain of another person is considered as one's own pain and the happiness of another as one's own happiness. Compassion takes the place of competition. Every being that is created is unique and special. No two things are exactly alike, though they may have similarities. Even clones have separate time and space references. Thus we have to understand the
term equality. Equality has to be understood in the background of universal norms which include the whole of humanity and the cosmos.
Here scientific objectivity is replaced by a cosmo-psychology which
can even admit myths. Perhaps the nation state itself has outlived its usefulness and cannot
solve the emerging global problems. We see one such example in climate change which transcends all differences of language, nations, race, and social status. Maybe the concern about climate change is an echo of missing spirituality in modern life. A new epistemology is required to contexualize the notions we have about religion and spirituality. New words may have to be coined and new symbols invented if the present linguistic tooks cannot
clearly define the parameters and offer solutions. Dissidence is a symptom of a system that has ceased to function. Until a new paradigm emerges that can unify the diverse streams of
thought that have emerged in the context of modernity, we should
expect to see greater fragmentation. If the fragmentation and consequent sense of
alienation and disconnect acts like the proverbial grain of sand in
the oyster shell, provoking the formation of a pearl of priceless worth, then we
should consider dissidence as a process towards a greater unification
at a more universal dimension.
------------------------
19. Vinaya Chaitanya:
Spirituality as the inner dimension of the necessary affirmation of
the social/ outer dimension which binds together the humankind,
whether in the name of a Fatherhood of God, and the ensuing Fraternity
of humans; or in the name of a Self, common to all, and this second
type is more the Eastern way,
and dissent as the ex-pression of the inner growth and evolution of the
person, constantly weaning one from limiting understandings previously
held, unquestioned beliefs. E.g. when Jesus says: " you have heard it
said... but verily, verily, I say unto you...". So there is a
re-valuation going on, opening up one's visions and newer
possibilities of understanding and relating to fellow-beings. To see
it as being relevant to purposeful human life, instead of seeing
spirituality as the preserve of some chosen ones, seeing life itself
as being spiritual. In this sense education itself could be
spirituality, and we are all involved in it, in and through all our
life....
----------------
18. jeevanasi:
Most of the frozen ideas of spirituality seem to have an anchoring on positing spirituality as involving certain privileged state of being and awareness. Hence, it has always been a case of spirituality is being defined as a state of life with certain dignified mode of existence. Identities such as Sanyasi, Swami, Guru, Buddha, Yogi, Siddhar, Priest, Pope, Mullah, and the likes are often typified to be the formal head hood in the kingdom of spirituality. Besides them, socio-political leaders, pundits, writers, poets, artists, reformers, industrialists, martyr, and so are also found to be entertaining the leadership of spiritualdom. All such spiritual identities signify a dignified level of existence or accomplishment, which bear the trait of success or achievement in life. Of course, the mark of success has its contrasting point of the condition of fallen-existence of ordinary life in the mundane world.
When spirituality is understood or being projected only in terms of these formal modes of dignified state of existence, the popular forms of living appear to be unworthy of any qualification of spiritual dignity. The spiritual promises seem to be getting justified in the name of the materiality and the consequent drudgery of everyday life. An inwardly withdrawal from the worldly affairs and strivings, and from the assertions of accompanying values and sensibilities of life are only remaining worthy of getting spiritualistic considerations. If things are other way around, the situation is none other than the degeneration or failure. Here, the simple ways of living, hardships endured for the subsistence and sustenance of life become something of less dignified and unaccomplished. Perhaps, it might be against the context of such a categorization of spirituality, which could go by the term spiritual elitism that the assertions of life embodied by the reactions and endeavors of many freaks and wayward people of ordinary level becomes significant. Accordingly, there may possible to have a de-mystified or un-privileged vision of spirituality, whereby the every ex-pressions of un-pretended life as such becomes an ex-pressions of spirituality. The admonitions of drunkards in streets, prattles of madmen, failures of prodigals, criminals, sinners, scoundrels, prostitutes, rebels, vagabonds, bohemians, nomads, hippies, ecstasy of bathroom singers, bedroom dancers, prison-house dreamers, day dreamers, anonymous writers, guerilla squads, slavery of kitchen, toils of farming, assertions of suicides, self-bombers, etc could be viewed as the actions/reactions of spirituality of a different kind. One may put them under the category of dissident or counter cultural stream of spirituality, if the concept of spirituality should not be left out as the prorogation of somebody alone.
--------------------------
17. Himanshu Damle:
...spiritual dissent of the popular kind is gaining fashion and is more like militant atheism is to be seen almost anywhere, i guess. but the more serious spiritual dissent that is technical in nature and requires the knowledge of so called spirituality is rare indeed.
-----------------
16 Dr. Pooja Vyas:
Spirituality, is a very vague and complicated term, which includes in itself so many shades of ideas which contradictorary in themselves thought- currents, for instance, Theism, Mysticism and all that goes in the name of the conventional religious viz dry formalism, ritualism, doctrinal absolutism, dogmatism etc.
&& the New Age Spirituality, which belongs to the Internet age of today, is altogether different from the entire previous notions &. The modern man believes in the essence of the cultimate reality, but at the same time, he also wants to seek all the material comforts, provided by the ultra modern appliances, discoveries and Inventions. In the realm of material progress the present man has attained the zenith, but in the field of moral and spiritual progress is proving to be a big zero, corruption is being experienced in all the walks of life and for fighting this menace of corruption, we have to take recourse to a new brand of spirituality&.Naturally such spirituality shall be free from all the dogmas, blind faith and backwardness.
Modernity and progress shall be the hallmarks, of the new age spirituality. &. the grand synthesis, describes at length in the Gita, by Lord Shri Krishna can be the basis of such a revolutionary spirituality. The Sanatan Dharma of the Gita- Teacher, as is well known, combines in itself the aspects of cognition, Emotion and Will. These have been beautifully described by Bhagvan Shri Krishna as Jnana, Karma and Bhakti yoga and the three culminate into the most important conception of Nishkam Karma Yoga.
--------------------
15. Roshni:
......While the predominant stream of sociologists maintained revolution as pathological, the dissidents amongst them viewed revolution as undeniably rooted in religion; whereas philosophers who identified more with the dissident stream had to assimilate the equation between revolution and its religious roots onto an altogether new terrain by assessing the epistemic value of the religious/spiritual/mystic element that is inherent in the notion of revolution.
-----------------------------
14.Jayasree A.K.
All other organisms, except human beings, are spiritual (in the sense of what I studied about spirituality from the scripture) by their mode of existence. Human beings have to articulate and practice spirituality. This deviance occurs because we have the reflective organ which creates the fear of death and also a social life in which there is herd feeling which alienates others and again creates fear. In order to reconcile this fear, we need spirituality.
Other organisms relate and respond directly to nonliving and living beings without the complexity of reflection. They do their functions (dharma) and just drop off the life. They do not think about past and future. Just live in the present. Since they do not have the worry of what is attained or to be attained, they are in the state of moksha. Both death and hatred to other are contradictions in human life. Spirituality is the attempt to reconcile it. And also I wonder, why cant we give a higher spiritual position to fruit trees, considering certain characteristics?
A fruit tree is so trustful to be rooted on earth. She is not afraid of others. So she does not develop any locomotor organs to run away fearing others. Her ancestors chose to cook food for others by photosynthesis, while animal kingdom chose to eat others and each other. She provides sweet fruits to others and animals help her for propagation. She stands still totally trusting others. She gives shade and protection to others. She connects many things in the universe, the sun, water, earth, air, flies, animals etc. This is the height of spirituality in the human sense.
..............................
13.Prof. Tandra Patnaik
I feel though, conceptually and insome cases, practically religioin and spirituality are conceptually independent, their inter-relationship is undeniable.
In practice, majority of the people still feel religion (not in theistic sense) is an important means of spirituality.
My study of the dissident religious (so-called) movements convinces me that right from Ezuthachan in Kerala to the Mahima Panthis of Orissa have expressed their voice of dissidence through the diverse modes of spirituality. The Opressed and the down-trodden in the society have been assured of a place under the sun though such dissident streams in spirituality. What is more important is that, such voice of dissidence can still be heard in the practical life of a sizable section of the society.
Finally, such dissident streams of spirtuality cannot be studied by uprooting them from the prevalent social, political and cultural realities. As Dali Lama very rightly remarks," If Christians take a Buddhist concept such as emptiness and try somehow fit it into their philosophical tradition it will look very awkward, it will become almost hotch-potch. To use a Tibetan saying, it will be like trying to fit the horn of a yak on the head of a ship".
------------------------------
12. Uday Kumtekar
Infact there is an urgent need for redefining spirituality.Rather more aptly to return to amore
correct definition of spirituality from a wholistic point of view.The domains of religion,philosophy
and spirituality along with material world ned be viewed as a coordinated whole and not in
contradiction to eachother.Indian tradition has always highlighted the fact that appearantly
opposite facts and entities are but components of a united whole.This is the essence of all
cults of Indian origin.
------------------------------
11. Isha.
............What is central in the Greek context is that
the asceticism in relation to vegetarianism there arose a debate for and
against among the philosophers of diverse schools of thought. In this
debate there is a clear reference to the tribal heritage of the social
frame where elemets like kinship, taboo and non - violance were
cospicuous. This heritage is common to both the Greek and the Indian although there was no rigorous debate in the context of the latter.This, as I see, can be traced in the spiritual componant of both contexts. The defence depends on primary sources which most specifically involve the religious and philosophic.....there is enough ground to defend the view that Budhism is an offshoot of the Lokayatha school of philosophy or rather the nastika school and tha
its spiritual dimension has much in common with the original Tantrika,
Samkya and Lokayatha. I try to observe a parallel in the European context
i.e. Greek and the Buddhist in my study which I am doing in Germany.
The modern German and French philosophers with whom I am acquainted are
pretty impressed by the doctrines of our side of the globe!-...
--------------------------------------------------
10.Ananda Mishra
You have been successful to identify various unexplored dimensions of "spirituality" which should draw the notice of social scientists working in the field of religions,religiosity and spirituality....A"Trancendence","Sacred","Enlightenment"and"Earnest urge for Truth",I think, are the key concepts of spirituality.
-----------------------------------
9. Maciej Karasinski:
...Tantra is often explained by a reference to the verbal root, tan to stretch, expound and tr - to save, so that the term became an indicator for the soteriological importance of the doctrine. As explained by Santidev, Tantras history up to the era of the Siddhas can only be conjecture, but it appears that originally, in the guise of fertility cults, it belonged to the pre-Aryan, tribal worshippers of the Mother Goddess and later to the low castes and out-castes of Hindu society. Then over the centuries, as they became sanskritized and more sophisticated, these cults assimilated brahmanical deities, their rituals and the principles of mantra.
Tantra endorses the empowerment created by ritually employing the impure substances and performing rites considered as anathema by Hindu orthodoxy. Thus, Tantric spiritual discipline induces states proximate to divine ecstasy, reveal divine consciousness as a form of experience that transcends the boundaries of ordinary convention. However, as said by Sanderson, many Tantric rites are modeled on normative (smrta) rituals, e.g. the Hindu sacramental rites (samskra), the daily obligatory rites performed by the orthodox caste Hindus, such as ritual bath, worshipping the Sun at special junctures of the day (sandhyrcan) and the water-oblation - to gods, ancestors etc. Tantric modifications of these rites are mainly theological.
The Hindu rituals in general are oriented by axes of purity/ impurity and auspiciousness / inauspiciousness. The Kaula Saiva Tantrism of Kashmir integrated the antagonistic paths of purity and power in its sadhana. According to Abhinavagupta, one could be internally a Kaula, externally an orthodox Saiva while remaining Vedic in ones social practice.....
-------------------
8. Isha
Ethics function as essentially a cultural phenomenon in both contexts. The
primal innocence of the tribal society based on the concepts of mother
right and agriculture throws much light on the collective character of
thought which is reflected in the form of an ethical basis of its social
strata. This innocence, despite its crude nature, corresponds to the communal
character of the concept of equality and justice where animals were
provided an equal share of concern. The tribal life in its earliest phases
favoured blood less sacrifice and vegetarianism.. The trend is viewed in
Jain, Buddhist and Ajivaka schools of philosophy.
The same is found in the Greek context though by about the 4th century
B.C. a lively debate emerged for and against the practice of
vegetarianism. The pioneers of the movement in keeping with the Indian
being Orpheus and Pythagoras their ideas made way for the practice of
asceticism in late antiquity. This is the case that I see in this topic and it calls in for some
interesting queries like: The origin of vegetarianism?
Its extension to asceticm
The relation between asceticism and ethical thought?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
7. Swahilya Shambhavi
Dissident streams dissolve when we focus on the one water that flows through all. Whether it is Advaita, Vishishtadhwaita or Dwaita - the subject of all the topic focusses on the one ocean of consciousness which paves the way for being aware of all our thoughts, words and actions.
When the focus is just on God, Consciousness, Awareness, Truth, Reality, Tao, Zen, Being, The One, Isness or by any name we may call it - all dissidence vanishes. Only one remains. Being together with the divine oneness that is the essence of all creatures is the path shown by spirituality. All the apparent differences are simply the various ways that lead to this same goal of being one with the divine consciousness that exists in all life and non-life - along with it and beyond it too.
The only path that can lead to this is through Karma yoga - doing the work that is given to us with full enthusiasm, Bhakti Yoga - not stopping with the love we show for just the one divine form that we choose, but focussing on expanding our love to all the forms and names we see around us - human and otherwise and Gnana Yoga - realising intellectually that consciousness is the essence of all things just as water that we cannot see exists in the sky as vapour, which then becomes many things like water, river, oceans, clouds, rain, snow, ice, sleet....many forms of the one.
-------------------------
6. Prof. A. Kanthamani.
.....my feeling is that your indigenous outlook needs extremely strong support. Unfortunately your responders do not contribute much. ...You can't put all the blame on your responders. They simply respond the way you respond to the problem at hand. You have to state the in clear terms so as to evoke reactions on both sides. Your account of dissident streams need a location so as to identify the real problem. Your difficulties are more or less the same as others who write or reflect about religion but while other may cite evidences you care less about it. The way one articulates a problem requires extreme care. You seem to believe that your reflections are sufficient to locate the problem you have in mind. But they are not. So also the responders. What I miss is the intensity of social thinker which is not innate but acquired over a long and arduous period of time in response to a problem. You have to go a long way to achieve this. ..... The term 'dissident stream' requires careful definition and more clarity. Especially when you have something in mind which has not been seen in this particular way by others. My suggestion is to reflect more on this to carve a path.
---------------------------------
5. Argo Spier.
The following came to mind when I was working through the text ... and seeing how some who commented ache to have a consensus regarding the definition of the issue at hand - 'dissident spirituality'. What came to mind was something that Wittgenstein pointed out in connection with the in vacuo analysis of concepts, namely that definitions are never to be treated as singular supra entities having independent meanings, but rather as units that are 'also' determined by 'life forms' and the 'natural environment' with all its biological and psychological aspects. These external factors and 'natural aspects' have, however, no unique predominance in the search for meaning and do NOT lead to an a priori of the result. They are rather restrictions, not providing the inevitable condition for (the) meaning (of a definition). Therefore, the search for the meaning of concepts cannot be limited to how we actually use them (and 'exact definitions' cannot be determined solely by the way we effectively use them). It (meaning) only becomes 'clearer' when we also research HOW WE COULD USE mentioned concepts in all sorts of non-factual and imaginative circumstances. It is only then that the 'borders' and/or limit of the definitions become vaguely visible and we slowly start to understand what it is that a definition (of a concept) carries in itself, and what this meaning really CONTAIN. Personally I think that this is a very relevant issue in the search for a viable platform on which a discussion of dissident spirituality is to be placed into a position to flourish. It is also an important issue tout court in any discussion that wishes to pose 'final' truths 'about' religion and as spirituality feeds also on the imaginative and undefined. But there is a dialectical tention to the issue, which too encourages us to be patient, namely that the more precise our use of language is becoming (and therefore our forming of definitions), the further away we drift from the understanding of that what we are expecting from what we have come to define as 'meaning', because the clarity of our own logic is NOT the result of our investigation but it only ARISES from our priority (the point from which we departed). Is one forced to view this last as a status quo? No, it just imply that our priority IS the beginning of our growth of insight into the meaning of concepts ... and that by seeking to 'define' the concept 'dissident spirituality', we already have embarked on a journey that is slowly shifting us towards the dissidence of spirituality itself.
------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Venugopalan K.M.
1. Spirituality should, in my view, neither be limited by land nor by language.
2. It can have variant ex-pressions depending on the components
comprising all humans' lived experience albeit in varying points of
space and time. But, efforts toward finding the common threads in such
experiences nullify all those showcased notions of philosophy and
spirituality characterised by typical representations of nationality
,language and such things, except for the sake of convenience of
opening the realm of spirituality for debates.
3. One would do better to go beyond, without being confined to the
designated categories of spirituality.
One can not have a notion of spirituality without having recourse
to some or other variety of its materialistic counterpart; e.g; the
level and quality of the material life you are in; the level of
freedom you enjoy or you want to aspire in your life vis a vis your
fellow humans- that which is not just in your neighbourhood, but even
in geographically distant spots.
------------------------
3. Dr. Madhu P.
One more version may be required to streamline the ideas expressed. Idea of spirituality, I do not know, whether could be separated from essence. Spirit seems to me an essence. However, this spirit as essence could be distinguished from essentialism as essentialism reifies social conventions as if they were inevitable essences and thereby justifiable.
Idea of spirituality still remains that which represent the sublime than that which practiced in its name. Unspeakablilty is still the characteristics of spirituality. Spirituality would still mean one emerging beyond the phenomenal, thus it becomes unspeakable.
Differences among spiritual orientations need not always amount to dissents. There can be diversities of spiritual understandings as they were understood by different individuals. Say for instance, there can be Tibetan, Chinese, Japanese and Indian versions of spiritualities guided by the Buddhist way. Also, there can be agora sivism along with Kashmiri saivism. There can be Kali oriented spiritualities and Buddha oriented ones.
However, there can also be witnessed spiritualities oriented on the principles of purity and pollution also the spiritualities of the believers and infidels. Such a practice of spirituality that treats its others as unworthy should be distinguished from the practices that has no such self-reverential or other-humiliating view points. In such practices of spirituality where its others are seen with contempt or repulsion- we witness dissents as the other seen contemptuously might resist. Such a spirituality of the people who were contemptuously treated could be seen as dissenting spiritualities. However, one need not presuppose that this contempt could only be resisted through dissident spiritualities, though we have instances of such resistances in very many spiritual dissents as we could witness in the life and works of Sri Narayana Guru, Chattambi Swamigal, Dr. Ambedkar, Swami Vivekananda, founders of PRDS, Dalit Christian movements, etc., and also in the spiritual dissents of Mahatma Gandhi. Such kinds of dissents could also be observed in every day resistance, struggles and sarcasms of the dissenting persons in their everyday life. Such a resistance is not always spiritual. They are more political than spiritual. However, we can claim that real spirituality of understanding, compassion, etc., are possible may be only through such a dissenting spiritualities. Why to bring spirituality to explain this politics of dissent? The term spirituality, I think, may bring in confusions and ambiguities. Can spiritualities be so much social like politics usually is? Or, is it possible to have a socialized or massified spirituality? Looking at them as politics with spiritual claims would be better, I think. If it is seen as politics there is a lot more can be explored like- co-option, conflict of interests, etc. your writing concerned about. Is not that the context of spirituality you are trying to highlight political? May be that what we are discussion is more of the faith-politics than spiritual dissents.
---------------------------------
2. Argo Spier,
What Maslow said re 'relogion' was that it doesn't cover the 'whole' of the phenomenon as there is
a tendency in non-religious people to be 'religious' too. All people have 'top-experiences of total thruths' in which intuition, 'knowing' leads to that person 'treading on his or her height', in which that person is 'transcended into a higher being'. Please note that I use inverted commas indicationg the 'looseness' of the concepts. I agree with Maslow, well, its bloody obvious anyway, and this gives a broader scope to religious experiences (not undermining or ridiculing any of the experiences being had in any religion). Now the (loaded) 'freedom concept ... what is freedom? I think a definition such as = 'it is the freedom to tread on your hight as a human being' could go a long way. This holds the 'Christian' concept of it. Freedom is the 'right, obligation, and mercy' to be in a position to exeperience the fullness of what your potentialities as a human being are (that includes the 'more' possibilities or the 'transcended thing', top- experiences as Maslow put it. (By the way Maslow is a humanist and I am a 'Christian re-born' which really are the opposites. On certains issues of in Maslows analysis I am not that hot, etc.). A lot of things enters however this 'freedom' definition portrayed here. There's the 'example issue' of it, the 'apocalyptic Offenbarung' (german concept), etc. and the fact, in Christianity, that it is the 'other' who is to define the extend of its truth-value. Many of these aspects cannot be 'discussed' as the only become visible in the transcendent mode, in the added 'more-value'. Example re the inbring of the other ... the concept of 'love they neighbor' and 'being a brother' to somebody. When you are caring and loving towards another ... well, you cannot really, be that towards people. Its them who defines whether you are 'worth it' to be called a brother and you can only pray to God (JHWH) to give you the mercy to be in a position and 'worth it' to be called a brother of the other. And this is where your 'height' (freedom to be human) comes in ... where and when you 'become' a human being. People don't excist, people become people ... as Jacques Lacan, another Phychiatrist and pupil of Freud formulated it. Its in the 'more' that the 'freedom' lies, in the 'becoming'. Christians say, it is through the Death of Christ (Jezus on the cross) that we are bought free. And they ask you 'who do you say Christ is?' Who do you say God is? It is the 'you' that determines the possibibility of appearing conditions in which the 'more' and transcended becomes possible ... the conditions that leads to 'treading on his height' of man ... of man 'having' his freedom.
Hopes this gives you a better idea of what 'the Christian' understands under the concepts of 'freedom' and 'religion'. Christians doesn't understand the word 'religion' as what they experience has nothing to do with religion. It has to do with 'becoming', hope, etc. and truths that can only be conveyed by the grasping of stories.
I send you an aricle I wrote re the relationship between a 'poet' and the 'definition of poetry' ... that'll give scope as to how I work and interpret this 'more' in definitions and phenomena.
Regards to your ..... and Kerala (they say its god's country mm - nice eh?)
Smile
-----------
1. Sunilkumar k. k.
| | i think, spirituality has to be understood, not only in terms of religion, but also in terms of belief, ideological concert and all other for of ex-pressions. Today spirituality is a mask to hide many things under. So any enquiry about spirituality should begin by removing the mask. There is a moment or many moments in everybody's life in which he is enjoying/experiencing spirituality. Can you think about the idea of 'spirituality in every moment'. This search should also incorporate the role/relevance of individuality in the age of new age spirituality. | |
THE EARLIER BRIEF NOTE AND RESPONSES
[Reponses Sl. Nos.1 to 29]
See Theme-note at the end. No. 30.
1. K.P. Sasi.
I could not see adivasi spirituality in your list. Perhaps a genuine search into this area can
change the perception of politics today.
--------------------
2. Prof. Udayakumar
. I do think that further research on this issue is very necessary in India, especially in
Kerala.
------------------------------
3. Swami Vinaya Chaitanya
Dropping out from the social context withdrawing to some extent from playing the game of
life as it is played around, so that one can gain some perspective on what is going on, are
all implied in the tradition of sanyasa or tyaga. Founders of all major religions or spiritual
traditions have always seen to have rebelled against deadening/overweighing
theocratic/religious structures of their times. But it also is to be noted that the movements
started in such spirits also become equally heavy on the frail human spirit.
I would distinguish spirituality or the essential living core, as the humans natural
aspiration to be in union with the life around her; as well as the effort to visualise and
emulate the highest felicity or happiness within oneself. Religion, the, would be the
peripheral/incidental dos and donts etc. like the bark of a tree, often dead or
dying. If the life within the tree is strong, firmly rooted, open to light, life keeps growing
and death is overcome, daily. If the life force is weak within, the dying/deadening outer
conditions can kill the tree altogether.
The duality between spirit and matter is false and recent one. Happiness results only
when spirit and matter are in harmony. Since we all seek happiness, spirituality is innate
within us. Whereas, the religion has social and other factors complicating it. Also to be
noted in this specific context is that sad yet telling fact that religious spirituality as it exists
now is exclusively mans; with no place for women and children in it. And even
the women practitioners themselves become like men. The split between body and mind or
spirit is also mans. May be the question really is can there be spirituality without
the body?
Not that any of these ideas are new. Examples of counter-points to the conventional
mores are many, in mythology as well as in history. It just needs openness and willingness
to listen to deeper, smaller, stiller voices within us. I also often wonder why Kerala is being
advertised the wold over as gods own country, while we all know that actually it
is the country of the goddess! Why did our ancestors find nothing derogatory in
worshipping and celebrating the eternal coupling of Siva and Parvati, our prime parents?
-----------------------------
4. Dr. P. Madhu
.
The phrase 'religious spirituality' appeared to me an oxymoron. Denominal, sectarian
divisions are typically part an parcel of religions; spirituality in that sense is neither social
nor historical.
Co-opting what may be called spirituality by religion- i do not think- one entity called
religion co-opting another entity 'spirituality'; rather religion had always wearing the mask
of spirituality. In other words, spirituality is only the 'front stage of the religious
dramaturgy.
Religion is 'ideological in Marxian sense, where as spirituality has no 'ideology'. If
spirituality is a spring that freshly springs out, religion is just a gutter that collects all
ideologies from past to present and into future. Hence I said religion is historical. Religion
forces one to be conformatory; Spirituality forces no conformity to established norms or
dogma. Religions always do 'social engineering'- spirituality has no such engineering
dimension. Religions are products and transmitters of 'power' that runs through the social
vein. Being spiritual is to transcending the gutter of power. Hence, spirituality will always be
dissenting.
Does spirituality have anything with faith in divinity? Can faitheads be spiritual? Religion
needs faith. Because religion wants its members faithfully subscribing to it. Faith indeed
de-spiritualizes. radicals of faith, are just radicals of faith- it may be a misnomer to call
them 'spiritual radicals'
Spirituality knows no 'sacredness'- religions survive by terrors of sacred claim.
I do not think spirituality has to be understood in contra distinction to religion alone.
Spirituality can be understood in contradistinction to any ideology. However, since religion
uses spirituality as its mask, religion occupies a special place in the contra distinctive
objects.
----------------------------------------------
5. A.V. G. Warier
jagrat svapna sushuptishu sphutatara
ya samvidujrumbhate
ya brahmadi pipeelikantatanushu
prota jagatsakshinee
saivaham na cha drushyavastviti
drudhaprajnapi yasyasti chet
chandalostu dvijostu
gururityesha manisha mama
Is not the gurutva envisaged by the master the central theme of spirituality?
In the name of Shankara we seem to be walking away from him. We seem to be saying -
whatever you may say about spirituality we are here not only to perpetuate divisions but
also to amplify its scope.
---------------------------------------------
6. Dr. Ajay Sekher
In response to K P Sasi's comment that adivasi spirituality can also be included, we can only
say that the term dalit spirituality or subaltern spirituality incorporates all the minor and
alternative streams in terms of culture, ethnicity, gender, caste, religion and language. The
politics and purview of the term dalit/subaltern need to be comprehended before hand in a
discussion like this.
--------------------------------------
7. Dr. P. Madhu.
The 'civilized' [sarcasm intended] started talking about spirituality
only when they wanted to mask something else in that name. The
discussion/ discourse concerning spirituality becomes possible only when
something 'non-spiritual' identified/recognized/feared--- where there is
no non/anti spiritual, there exists no need to discuss spiritual though
one can be very much spiritual otherwise.... truth is necessitated only
when there exists/recognized/felt falsehood... when no falsehood is
recognized/felt there is no necessity for any discussion of truth.
What was the thing necessitated adivasi/ dalit spirituality discourse?
what was the thing masked in such a 'spirituality'? What is this
spirituality to do with dalit/adivasi religiosities? To what extension
the contradistinctions possible between dalit/adivasi religiosities and
spiritualities? Is it analytically sound to club adivasi and dalit
spiritualities/ religiosities together?--- Are dalits and adivasis share
same history- to have similar religiosities?
------------------------
8.Fr. Gasper
.
What is the role of reason in spirituality? Spirituality V/S Corporeality?
-----------------------
9. Swami. Vyasa Prasad
I felt I was entering a New Age book shop. I guess professors and academics
need neatly labeled categories to work with. Instead of an outsider trying
to look inside, it would help to reverse the gaze.
-----------------
10.Dr. T. Girish
Remember Aristotles theory of "Form and Matter"? Can we not say, that if religion is Form,
then Spirituality is the matter?
I mean, Spirituality is the reality, which requires some sort of form to exist. I do not know if
spirituality could exist just as spirituality, as matter can not exist other than through some
or the other forms. Perhaps religion is the mode for spirituaity; the yana, or soome kind of
carrier.
Nonetheless, spirituality shall be the essence, the in thing, that really distinguishes man
from not-man.
-------------------------------
11. Chindhu
I am more concerned about the social functioning of the spiritual or religious or quasi-
religious movements. It's a historically proven fact that the spiritual or religious or quasi-
religious movements have done its contribution to humanity. We can find evidence in the
renaissance history of Europe, India and Kerala.
One main characteristic of any branch of science is its predictability. We could predict a
future phenomena based on the theories and data available today. In social science also we
are doing the same in several areas like demography, economic changes etc. is it possible
to predict one spiritual or religious or quasi-religious movement using social indicators? If
it is possible what should be the indicators to be used?
We desperately need a paradigm shift in assessing the spiritual or religious or quasi-
religious movements/institutions. It will be a better contribution especially in the context of
the contemporary debates in Kerala on such movements and/or institutions and/or persons
involved in spiritual or religious or quasi-religious activities.
---------------------------------------
12. Philip George
Well, you have rightly pointed out the concepts of religion and spirituality are not mutually
exclusive. Religion and Spirituality, both are embedded with a particular form of ideological
perception. It is highly notable that you have touched upon a religionless spirituality. Since
spirituality and religion are not mutually exclusive, naturally there can be a doubt why
someone should search for finding the dissident streams of spirituality.
----------------------------------------
13. Dr. P. Madhu
Here I refer to the form-matter discussion initiated by Dr. Girish. In
Aristotelian sense, it seems spirituality rather than religion would be
thought as form; for Aristotle 'form' is the primary substance- which
gives unity to the 'matter'. Form for Aristotle is more real than
matter; form is conceptualized in Aristotle as reminiscent of the sole
reality of the ideas.Aristotle's form semble more alike Plato's idea.
Seen from Aristotelian sense, hence, i suspect whether 'religion' can be
taken as 'form' . This is how i learnt the form-matter concept of
aristotle. If I am wrong I would like to be corrected.
In the modern sense of the term it can be said that what we see in the
religion-spirituality relationship is that the 'form' (external shape,
shell) annihilating 'matter' (substance, content). The beauty of the
argument of 'spirit' its is formlessness, its incorporeality! Spiritual
claims are just masks worn by religions. Spirituality is just like the
shell worn by the hermit crabs. Religion only wears the shell of
spirituality. Inside the shell what flourishes is nothing more than
narrow identities, communal separatism and the politics emerging from
such identity positions. hence i once wrote religion is historical and
social where are spirituality has no compulsion to be social or historical.
-------------------------
14.Prof. Sanil. V
This is a very significant topic for a workshop. You have proposed many
creative possibilities. Perhaps it is better to focus on a specific
historical era in kerala history or on a set of personalities.
Most recent discussions on spirituality try hard to distinguish or
distance spirituality from institutionalized religion. Religion is equated
with orthodoxy and spirituality is seen as a dissenting core. I doubt this
way of posing problem will lead us to any understanding of religion,
spirituality or dissent.
Another challenge lies in equating spirituality with morality. In many
recent discussions spirituality seems to be this moral work we do on
ourselves so that we can control our emotions, desires and appear and clam
and cool. I do not think ethics needs this spirital support! How can we
free spirituality from this user-friendly ethics? How can we think about
dissidence as a meeting point of politics and spirituality while
suspending the claims of ethics? These are some of the isses which
interest me. more later
-------------------
15.Prof. K. Satchidanandan
I am interested in the interface between the spirtual and the physical on the one
hand(remember the Tamil saivites or Kannada Veerasasivas who attached great importance
to the body and labour_ Kayaka is Kailasa, Basavanna) and spiritual and the social/ethical on
the opther( Narayana, Vivekananda, Gandhi) both these being parts of a whole, the body
being the point of entry into the social/ethical as in Narayana.Look at things from below.
------------------------
16. Prof. C. P. Sivadasan
.
You have indeed chosen a very significant topic relevant to the Kerala society.
I think that in kerala problems arise partly because religion is mistaken for ritual even by
the socalled educated people.The problem becomes all the more complicated when religion
is made an instrument for gaining power and money. I dont know whether I am off the track
with respect to the main theme.But I feel that this can also be taken into consideration
within the ambit of the discussions.
---------------------------------
17. Prof. Manjulika Ghosh
Is there any family resemblance running through the different types of spirituality you have
thought up? Is there, on the contrary, any essence-spirituality, the different spiritualities
being the manifestations of the essential structure? There should have been mention of
Sufism as a dissident form of spirituality specially when Kerala is the focus, its having a
sizeable Muslim population.
-------------------------
18. A.V. G. Warrier
Often I feel that the process of thinking in this country is skewed by the obsession with
dalithood and related topics. Is not Brahma as the original dalit? He had to pull himself out
from his dalithood by tapas before the models for creation dawned in his awareness.
Dalithood is not an ideal but a state from which one should come out. Is not the focus on
dissidence an attempt to return to dalithood where ones concerns are modified
by several factors like politics, social realities etcetera?The sheer numbers of dalits is a
matter of great interest for a politician in a democracy. But should it be so for a
philosopher?!!
-------------------------------
19. Swami. Vinaya chaitanya.
Just wondering if it would help us understand the religion/spirituality
dichotomy if we look at it in terms of cosmology/psychology; that religion
is mostly about cosmological or theological explication of life/creation
etc., while spirituality is more of a psychologically biased enquiry into
one's own being.
-----------------
20. Prof. Bhagawan Dass Lahoti
.
proposed debate is interesting but it will be tough to manage.
----------------
21. Dr. P. Madhu.
The meaning of spirituality happens when we mean it. It can be meant as
something contrasted to the dogmatic or sectarian religiosities or it
can be dismissed as platitudinous if not nonsense. What passes in the
name of spirituality is often something of a sham, fueled by pretension
and dominated by hypocrisy. However, these do not explain what
spirituality is.
Spiritý in spirituality reminds me of being spirited being in good
spirit, being enthusiastic, passionate, shared passion, team spirit etc.
Spiritý is being socially concerned. it represents our sense of
participation and membership in a humanity and a world much larger than
our individual selves. Spiritý is the spirit of truthfulness contrasted
to the seduction into falsities. Being spiritual is being thoughtful,
inquiring, and trying to know the spirit of reality. Following Hegel it
can be said that spirituality is the passionate sense of self-awareness
in which the very distinction between selfishness and selflessness
disappears.
Spirituality need not be conceptualized as other worldly or alien from
our existence. Spirituality opens us to the new logic that liberates us
from narrow individualist essentialism..
Deferring from Prof. Sanil I hold that there is possibility of ethics and morality in this regime
too as it is possible in the regime of non-spiritual individuality. In other
words, outside and within spiritualities ethics and morality is
possible. The heart of spirituality is heartfelt activity filled with
intelligent feeling, action, reason, and passion together. Shutting
spirituality outside the regime of morality or ethics would be
synonymous to shutting wisdom from the regime of morality and ethics. It
should be observed that wisdom too is as amorphous as spirituality is!
Spirituality should not be confused with the renunciation of the
material, sensual, and social joys of life. It does not require becoming
a hermit, an eccentric, or an ascetic. It does not require the refusal
of comforts, luxuries, and erotic delights. Being spiritual is not just
being in solitude alone rather it is realizing the spirit of collective
co-existence. One need not live in sackcloth to be spiritual, as the
Buddha finally discovered in his explorations..
-----------------------------------
22. Words of late. Karunakaraguru, Santhigiri Ashramam, Thiruvananthapuram [forwarded
by Chindhu]
When you say spiritual knowledge, mostly it is a spirituality practiced by tradition.
The person who could judge on this is the one who has known all principles in detail, and
realizing the harm and damage, wishes to enlighten us. Only such a person could enlighten
us. Would it be alright to practice gender discrimination, keeping away women and making
it a men's privilege? That means we have not even thought about what rights women have.
Somebody please tell me if you believe that all mothers women who have lived as
mother, wife, daughter or sister have suffered. Only if you ask me could I explain and
help you realize. But if you say, 'No, I am a rationalist and nobody could enter my house', I
have nothing to say.ý
-------------------
22. Prasanthy Biju
we have to prove the spiritualism is applicable to all people, ie not only only for the high
class soicety but also for layaman .. we need that type of work
----------------
23. Dr. Marc Lambert
Sometimes the things that youre going through come
more real to you than the things you believe or
understand , Vincente Minelli, film director. The
(most important ?) problem of spirituality : at the
same time it is anchored in social life AND individual
and emotional experience ; spiritual experience being
supposedly one of the greatest emotional peaks one can
expect to reach, the will to share that experience
with others appears to be a natural human behaviour.
Can we teach spirituality through readings - we can
certainly discuss spirituality in human sciences and
philosophy -, or is it a personal evolution, a
discovery you make once you meet someone ? There are
things in the world which are neither reassuring, nor
explicable. (Alain Robbe Grillet, writer). How can
we talk and share it without hurting
everyones convictions ? Being socially organized
with(in) religions, should imply sharing some wider
basic vision or a project, instead of imposing a type
of path each spiritual master claims to be narrow.
--------------------
24. Prof. M. Gangadharan
Spirituality is for me the values such as kindness, love, tolerance, sympathy for fellow
beings, aesthetic sense, concern and appreciation of nature in its varied manifestations,
sense of harmony wth the opposite sex, `ahimsa', etc that human social life has generated
through centuries of its existence.
-------------------
25. Prof. G. Gangadharan Nair
Religious practices of the present, as the present party politics, do more harm to society
than good. Selfishness rules riot in them. When the devilish man corrupts the society in the
name of spirituality, there should be some corrective steps leading to reformation. In India ,
Valmiki, whom the present day jargon could term Adivasi, and Vyasa, son of a Dalit woman,
in the present sense of the word, could propagate the fundamentals of spiritualism among
all sections of society.
-----------------------------------
26. Dr. George Pattery
It is an interesting topic to deal with. I am interested in discussing it from various angles,
especially from the point of view of spirituality and religion. The institutionalization of
religion often weakens, at times destroys spirituality....
--------------------------------------
27. Chindhu
My concern is not about an immediate realization of the self. Let it come as it is. The
concern is about the social change as spiritual or religious movements always contributed
to some or other changes in the society.
One of the main characteristic of science is its predictability. So my attempt is to predict the
social change to be caused by a spiritual or religious movement.
Emile Durkheim points out the role of religious individualism in the increased number of
suicides among the Protestants compared to that of Catholics in his famous study 'Suicide
A Study in Sociology' (p158). The same religious individualism made its contribution to the
development of capitalism as pointed out by Max Weber (The protestant Ethics and The
Spirit of Capitalism).
So my doubt is about the concept 'Aham Brahmasmi'. Was it promoting some kind of
religious individualism in the Indian context? We could refer to Kancha Ilayya's observation
that the rate of exploitation was very high among the higher class Brahmins in Indian
society where as among the Dalits it was comparatively less. Was it because of the religious
individualism propagated through 'chathurvakyas'?
If theories of salvation really play a role in molding human personality, a theory which
promotes salvation attained only through the fulfillment of the needs of all dependent
souls, which include all living and non-living entities result in creating a more socialist
society? Is it possible to predict on the social change to be caused through a spiritual or
religious movement by analyzing the theories of salvation promoted by that particular
spiritual or religious movement?
Shall we consider the theory of salvation promoted by a particular spiritual or religious
movement as a valid indicator to predict its contribution to the social phenomena?
---------------------------------------------
28. Marc Lambert
Possible tracks:
Some good entities in certain religions are considered as devilish in others. Mortification has been practised for centuries in catholic religion, especially in Middle Age, and then has been officialy denied. Torture was currently used by the Church (for the sake of the soul), meanwhile touching somebody is still one of the most codified activity in any culture.
Dissidence : sitting far away , but not being directly in opposition or involved in a social or/and political fight. Dissidence is indeed an attitude which is not inevitably steered against something, but which implies a discord or a distance taken with a power or a political authority.
In Europe, in spite of any historic legitimition, religion as an institution constitutes a safe railing for the central political power. Religion allows to question the existence in an established moral frame; therefore it strengthens and legitimises the State catholic religion, and its reforms. We can see nowadays with Moslem religion (islam as a new power and human constituent within the state), an attempt of the central political power to bring to foreground a legislated structure integrated into the functioning of the republican state.
It seems (is it the same movement ?) that the first concern of integrated Churches is the one of the moral order, less than that of the practical access into spirituality by physical or mental exercise, as it is often the case in India, where physical dimension establishes the spiritual act towards divinity. In that case, mental questionning is secondary.
I am wondering about the problem of religion, or religions in the modern Indian State. The arrival of capitalism and rationalization of human rhythms, following terms of material profitability in this geographical space. So far, It has been emptiing out the lively forces out of Kerala towards the Gulf countries. The question for the culture upholders is not the one of variation of the rites and their changes, but simply their disappearance (the case of Tiyattu ; 3 performing families in1993, only 2 performers in 2008). The economic question is quite different, it is the one of profitability the market of spirituality. Man (as a body) being situated in the center of many spiritual practices often interpreted in West as " sacred theaters ".
There is a shift between spirituality and organized religion. Religions dont have the monopole of spirituality (the case of art in the West). We should be clear about the way we use the word ritual (individual or collective, repetitive series of operations), and spirituality , which sometimes is taken for granted as for its goal and meaning ( moksha ; paradise ; energy ; God / Goddess - as a gendered entity, etc...). Does society with its political legitimate power (including Religious Bodies) really integrate the possibility for individuals (or a group of people) to derive, alter, modify the social and economical planification ? Or is the fate of dissident spirituality to work far, to exceed the goals of a modern liberal society based on democracy and free market ?
---------------------------------------------------
29. Swami. Vyasaprsad, Ooty.
I felt I was entering a New Age book shop. I guess professors and academics need neatly labeled categories to work with. Instead of an outsider trying to look inside, it would help to reverse the gaze.
--------------------------
30. UNDERSTANDING THE DISSIDENT STREAMS IN SPIRITUALITY
[Theme-note for the workshop]
[Department of Philosophy,Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit, Kalady, Kerala-
683574]
Though the concepts of religion and spirituality are not mutually exclusive, they often seem
to be at loggerheads with respect to ones priority over the other. Those who argue in
favor of religion consider it as a means for the realisation of the other. Whereas, the other
section would think the latter can exist independently of the former. This issue has
remained as a perpetual source of conflict within every religion.. However, when the
domain of spirituality is taken separately, it is seen to have a range of significance for life
outside the frame of religion. Such a perspective of spirituality has evoked a need for the
reconstruction of, or rethinking on the dominant conceptions of religious spirituality from
different quarters. It has also caused the denominational or sectarian divisions within the
established religions, paving way for the emergence of various reform movements. Viewing
the demand for religious reforms as a co-option or containment strategy, spiritual radicals
have called for the rejection of religion in favor of faith in the divinity. But there are
sections to view these changes rather as a reflection of dynamics of social realities and
other historical processes that take place in every society. Instead of confining the debate
on spirituality to the developments within the theological and denominational divisions, the
present proposal is to see the very dynamics of the concept of spirituality specifically.
Mysticism and the similar kind of deep-spirituality movements are often being
understood or identified as the dissenting voices within the organised religions; for their
challenges against the dry formalism, ritualism, and doctrinal absolutism and dogmatism
etc. At the same time the attributes like life negation, world denial, asceticism, other
worldliness, self-centeredness, pessimism, etc. are also ascribed to their traits in general.
However, it is to be debated whether these characterisations are suitable in the same way
for all the kinds of spiritual practices or perspectives of different cultures? If these traits
form the paradigm of spirituality, how do we understand the beliefs and practices that are
not conforming to this? Do we need to understand the spirituality in contra distinction to
religion alone? Do the beliefs and practices only form part of sheer non-spiritual ritualism?
Do all the ritual practices really form part of religion otherwise? How do we understand the
non-conformism of spirituality other then in terms of a critique of religion? Is there any
revival or recovery of spirituality within religion based on the issues other than theological
or ritualistic reasons? What are the possibilities of demarcating spirituality independently of
ecclesiastical reasons? Does every dissident stream of spirituality transcend the frame of
religion or fall back upon religiosity? How do we account the non-religious and non-
spiritual linkages of spiritual practices?
In order to explore the questions regarding the nature of dissident streams of spirituality, it
seems we need to address the specific practices in their specific contexts.
Focus of the Workshop
This workshop is the fourth one of its kind to be conducted by the co-ordinator towards
the direction of exploring the specificity and creativity of intellectual practices [of a region],
in relation to the extent of its conversancy with life-situation of the respective population.
This is also meant for drawing a broad perspective for a UGC Major Research Project on
The conceptual Dynamics of Religious and Spiritual Practices in Kerala: Towards a
Praxiological Analysis, which is being carried out by the co-ordinator. Therefore this
workshop shall be conducted with an emphasis on the spiritual practices of Kerala.
Co-ordinator,
P. K. Sasidharan
Email: pksasidharan@yahoo..com
Mob: 09447262817
Broad Areas of Attention.
Religion-Spirituality interface.
Religion, religiosity and spirituality
Dimensions of sanyasa.
Dimensions of spirituality
Spiritual reforms.
Secular spirituality.
Political spirituality.
Feminine spirituality.
Eco-spirituality.
Earth spirituality.
Dalit Spirituality.
Ethical spirituality.
Aesthetic spirituality.
Spirituality as religion.
Freedom spirituality.
Body oriented spirituality.
Civil religion,
Humanist religion.
Politics as spirituality.
Secular theology.
Liberation theology.
Negative theology.
New age spirituality
