Full Text: The Living Hindu Popular Religious Consciousness and Some Reflections on It in the Context of Hindu-Christian Dialogue

The full text of A. M. Abraham Ayrookuzhiel’s essay “The Living Hindu Popular Religious Consciousness and Some Reflections on It in the Context of Hindu-Christian Dialogue” is being transcribed from the original article published in Religion and Society, Vol. XXVI, No. 1, March 1979.

This transcription will preserve the original wording, structure, and references as they appear in the source. It is being added progressively from the scanned pages.

Introduction

This paper is divided into two parts. The first part is a description of some of the aspects of the living Hindu Faith as discovered in a place called Chirakkal near Cannanore in Kerala. In this section, the manner in which Hindus affirm a religious belief, the reasons of their religious outlook in life, the mode in which their belief in a Parasakti is experienced in their rituals, two types of values that go into the making of their conception of a Parasakti, the reasons of their worship, attitudinal changes towards symbols of their Faith, the pattern of changes in the understanding of concepts like Karma, Samaya dosam, rebirth and evil spirits are dealt with. But on some of these points only summary statements are made without citing the factual evidence for them, for reasons of space. This part I call the description of the living popular Hindu religious consciousness. The second part contains some of my reflections on these data in the context of Hindu-Christian dialogue.

I. Description of the Living Hindu Popular Religious Consciousness

A. The manner in which ordinary Hindus affirm a religious belief

The Hindus in Chirakkal who have a religious view of life almost invariably use the word Sakti to express their belief. The affirmation of their religious faith is somewhat in the following style.

I believe (visvas) that in the universe (lokam/prapancham) there is some kind of a Sakti. This Sakti is present in nature (prakriti) in many forms and modes (palarupam-bhavam). It is the mother (matavu) of manifest universe (sristi). According to the Bhagavad Gita, the universe (prapancham) came into existence from this one Brahman. All modes of being (avasta-bhedangal) are emanations (avantaravi-bhagangal) of this one Sakti (eka-Sakti). It is this life-giving force (chitanya Sakti) that pervades (nirannu-nilkkunnu) in me, in you and in all beings (sakala jiva-jalangal). This is a power that transcends nature (para Sakti/Prakritiyatita Sakti). It controls (niyantrikkuka) the universe (prapancham) and all the beings (jivajalang al) in it. We do not experience (anubhav) it as we are thinking of our own individual happiness. But if we conceive (samkalpikkuka) this Sakti as the mother of the universe and worship (upasikkuka) it, it is beneficial (gunam) to us.

B. The Reasons of their religious outlook in life

In the context of the above affirmation of faith in a power that transcends nature (para Sakti/Prakritiyatita sakti), if we ask them what are the reasons for holding on to a belief like this, the following are the kind of answers we get from a number of people. I have grouped them under eleven headings, with one or two examples for each type of reason. In the answers of people one or more of these reasons appear in different combinations.

(1) A sense of wonder about the Universe and its rhythm leads many people to affirm faith in a Universal power.

When I think of the world and life in it, birth and death, day and night, change of seasons, the presence of some great Sakti is felt. The phenomena of nature and the human condition make me think that there is a controlling (niyantrikkunna) Sakti. They will not happen (nadakukayilla) without a sakti . . .

The affairs of a country are run according to a certain set of laws which its people are bound to obey. If this is true of a country, it is also true that every man and every little blade of grass in the world is bound by the laws of Daivam. If man thinks that there is no Sakti above him, it only shows his ignorance. If there is no God (Daivam) how is a child formed, how do plants grow . . .?

(2) Another factor that leads many people to affirm a religious faith is the awareness that man is not the master of himself or of the universe. From their answers it appears that the genesis of this awareness is the experience of tragic events and problems such as death, disease, poverty, betrayal by man, anxiety about the future, etc. Faced with these problems, they feel that belief in a Power gives them the necessary strength and hope to live.

When I survey my life and what I see around me, I am convinced that it is not man who rules this world but the Sakti of Daivam. For things do not turn out as man desires. When we see the rise and fall of individuals we think of that Sakti. It reminds us of the lines of Punthanam who said:

Randu nalu dinamkondu oruttane tandilletti nadattunnatum Bhavan, Malika mukaliker iya mannante tolil marapu kettunatum Bhavan.

It is at such a time as this that we, almost without our knowledge, think of the greatness of Daivam and call, “Daivame”. What awaits man tomorrow, he does not know. Trust in some Sakti helps man to live.

(3) A third factor that leads people to affirm belief in a Sakti is the experience of the fact that prayers are answered. This usually appears in the form of stories of favour from a particular god. Because their prayer was answered they believe that their god is real.

According to my mother, I was born because of an offering (nercha) to Subramanyam. This makes me believe in the miracles of Daivam . . .

Swami grants what we ask. We therefore, worship him. Daivam helps those who worship him. In this world, there are good as well as dangerous Saktis. By means of prayer (japam/mantram) or omission of it we can please them or make them show their terrible anger.

There is no doubt that there is a Sakti above man and all other beings. Each one realizes this through certain individual experiences of his own. There are two kinds of puja namely satvic and tamasic. Tamasic puja may yield the result immediately though it may not last long. Satvic puja’s results are long lasting, though we may not get an immediate answer.

Here we should note that it is their forms of prayer, Nercha and Vazhipad which are answered. It makes them believe in the validity of those forms of prayer as well as the gods who answer those prayers. (cf. any book on the Mahatmyam of a particular God. It will narrate stories of favour as evidence of the power and the reality of that god).

(4) The moral feeling that there is a Sakti that rewards the righteous and punishes the wicked is another factor that leads to religious faith. People also say that such a moral fear is necessary for man to walk the right path.

Those who walk in truth and in humility, Daivam prospers,
Those who forget Daivam He punishes,

I believe that if we walk the right path without desiring harm to others and bear with patience all difficulties, doing our job dutifully, Daivam will help us reach a good stage in life—if not today, tomorrow.

The belief that all our deeds are known and seen by a Sakti is good. Someone up above (mela oral) sees and listens. We cannot live as we please. If we act forgetting Iswar, there will be ruin (nasam). We will get its proper wage (kuli). We will suffer the bad result (cheeta phalam). There must be some fear (oru bhayam) for man. Otherwise we will be so proud. Thoughts about a Sakti prevent many people from doing wrong.

It is Daivam who rewards everyone according to His karmam.

(5) Many people are inspired to affirm faith in a Sakti on seeing the great changes that take place in the lives of some people when they begin to believe in God. They also say a belief in God is necessary for a virtuous life.

When we see the sudden change in some people’s lives, we believe. Belief in a Sakti had changed their life. It gave them the ability to walk in the right path (nervazhi).

We can control ourselves if we believe and worship a Sakti. We need a Power to guide and lead us in the right path. We need a Sakti to lead us to good life.

(6) Experience of the presence and guidance of a Sakti in their lives makes people believe in it. Individuals claim the guidance and protection of a Power which, they say, confirmed them in their belief.

I believe that every action in my life is done under Daivam’s guidance. I feel that Daivam is watching me all the time.

In my troubles Daivam shows me a way out. I lead a contented life because of Daivam’s help. I prospered economically only after I began to believe in Daivam.

Amman guides me as a mother. Man needs such a power because he is fickle minded.

I have problems. But still my life goes smoothly because of my belief. I believe Daivam helps and supports me. For me everything is possible, because of Daivam’s help.

We obtain peace of mind if we think of Daivam. I pray and obtain peace of mind (mana santi). I have experienced Murugan’s presence.

(7) “Our ancestors¹ believed, therefore we believe” is the attitude of some others. They believe that their ancestors cannot be wrong. They taught them to believe. They also say that so many people believe and all of them cannot be wrong.

Our ancestors taught us to believe. I think that they knew better than we do.

Swamijis and Rishis have experienced Daivam.

Since all people around here, the whole society here, believe, it has become a habit with me. Since many people have belief (visvasam), there must be some Sakti. Otherwise how can you explain all these people going to places like Sabarimala, Guruvayoor, Parassini etc.

(8) That Faith is Faith’s own proof is the argument of many people.

God is there for the one who believes and not for the one who does not believe. It depends on one’s own state of mind.

Power of God (Daiva Sakti) is the power of belief (visvasa sakti). If we believe in Daivam, there will be blessings (anugraham) of that Sakti. There is no doubt about it. The Sakti exists for the believer (visvasikkunnavan). A stone has Sakti if we believe in it. Everything depends on our belief (visvasam). A rationalist (yukti vadi) has no experience of this because he has no belief (visvasam).

(9) Hope of life after death is another reason.

In the rainy season a lot of grass comes up; in the summer it dries up. We do not pay much attention to it. It is difficult to think that man is subject to the same conditions, that he is born, lives for a little while, dies and there is nothing more to it. All religions (matam) teach that it is not the life here and its pleasures that matter but the life hereafter and the eternal happiness (nitya santi) that comes with it. Hinduism (Hindu matam) believes that it is after many births one is born as man. It is the amount of good and bad deeds (papa punya pravarti) that one does in one’s life that determines what kind of next life he will merit. It is Daivam who decides all these. Daivam has given man the ability to discern what is good and what is bad. If one forgets all this and lives as he likes he will suffer for it.

When man’s abilities fail, Daivam’s mercy comes to aid him. My father’s health is failing. I am almost led to pray lest it happen as I fear. It was unusual that I prayed the other day when father wanted me to take him to temple. I went and returned after praying with him.

(10) The gods show signs. Signs believed to be from gods led some people to affirm faith in gods.

If we do not offer hair, something will go wrong. It may be that a member of the family will suddenly take ill, or some money has got to be spent unexpectedly on something or the other.

There are many saktis in this world. Man is under the influence of these saktis. It is not possible for man to live as he pleases. If we do not give to these saktis what is their due, they will show certain signs (Lakshanam/adayalam). For instance Pottan Daivam is the Daivam of our community (samudayam). We are bound to offer whatever has been offered to him for generations. If this is not done, some sign will be shown. Sometimes we may not understand these signs. But we can get them interpreted with the help of kanisan (astrologer).²

(11) Fear of Punishment. The saktis have shown their pleasure and anger in the form of favour and punishment.

Kuttichattan will finish me if I make any change in his traditional dance dress.

Stories of supposed mistakes and the punishment meted out by the gods as a result of them were narrated by people.

C. The mode in which they experience their belief in Parasakti

The Parasakti/saktis in which the Hindu affirms his faith do not remain for him merely at the level of ideas. The Hindu is in contact with his Parasakti. The nature of this contact we are able to know when Hindus are made to talk about their places of worship such as temples, mandapams, kavus, taras, etc.

In Chirakkal, where I did this study, two thirds of the people believe that temples, kavus, mandapams, taras of worship are places where the Sakti is made present. They believe that the divine spirit (Parasakti) can be brought to be present (avah) and stationed (kutiyiruttuka) on objects like an idol (bibam), a trident (sulam) or other objects of worship by prayer (mantram) and ritual action (anga-vik-shepa). Some illustrated this type of presence of Daivam by saying that “just as through a magnifying glass we can concentrate much sunlight on one spot, temples, mandapams, etc. are made to concentrate the spirit of Iswara (Iswara caitanyam) in one place.” They say different saktis like Sri Krishna, Muttappan, Someswari amma etc. are made present (kudiyiruttuka) in places like Katalayi, Parassini, Puzhati etc. These places are called their abodes (astanagal). In these places the Saktis of these daivangal are present in a special way.

There are also temples and shrines, they believe, which are built in places where the saktis of some gods were shown in some special form. The gods themselves of their own, will come to be present in these places.³

The god who is present in a particular place (kutikolluka) can be experienced by sincere believers through puja and other means of devotion.

Daivangal can remain only in places of devotion (bhakti) and purity (suddhi). Therefore, the power (prabhavam) of a god is found in a place as long as puja and other rituals are done and the place is kept pure (suddham).

One third of the believers, however, say that temples, mandapams, kavus, etc. are nothing more than symbols of God (Daivasamkalpam). The idol (pratista) they say is the symbol (samkalpam) for a formless Sakti to help focus the worship (aradhana) of believers. It makes them conscious of a superior Power. Those whose faith is firm are able to experience the Sakti there, as Iswaran manifests himself to those who seek him. To them the idol (pratista) is real as it is their guide and refuge.

People of this group have the same ideas as others who believe in the real presence of gods in temples, about the necessity of keeping the sacred places pure (suddham). Daivam, it will be said, cannot be experienced in impurity (asuddhi) and amidst a crowd. Some of them illustrated it in the following way: Water is present everywhere under the ground. But we have to dig a well to get it. In the same way, though Iswar is present everywhere we need an atmosphere such as obtains in temples to realize Iswar. For instance, at the time of sandhya puja, when all the lamps are lit, the conch is blown and sandal battis spread their fragrance, it creates for us an atmosphere of devotion (bhakti) and we feel a divine presence.

Two Approaches to Religious Rituals

We have seen above that there are two kinds of people among Hindus, one believing in the real sacramental presence of gods in their places of worship and the other believing only in a moral presence of gods in those places. There is a similar division of opinion when people are made to talk about their religious rituals.

Two tendencies can be noticed among people when they talk about religious exercises. One is to talk of religious ritual in terms of subjective meaning. That is, they talk of them in terms of their own personal will.

They say that they offer nerccha or vazhipad to the gods or do any religious exercise (chandang) “for our own satisfaction” (tripti, santosam), “for our own mental peace” (mana-samadanam). They say, “we feel happy when we take part in nerccha (offering) and receive the prasadam after having given it first to the gods. We get strength and courage (sakti and balam). It is not possible to give pleasure (santosam) to Daivam. It is man who gets contentment (tripti) by means of rituals.” Religious exercises “help us to be good”, “help us to avoid doing harm” (droham) to others “help us to get closer (adukkam) to Daivam”.⁴ Faithful observance of religious duties “confirm our belief (visvasam) and devotion (bhakti). They ‘help us to experience devotion (bhakti) more intensely,’ ‘help us to create a sense of God (Daiva vicaram)’.”

This does not mean that they attach no objective significance to the rituals. But the significance is usually expressed in such phrases as Daivankulyam/Nanma/Gunam undakum i.e. God will bless us; there will be blessings if we do these things. The following answer typifies the spirit of such answers: “Muttappan does not ask for our nerccha (offering) but he says what you prayed for will soon be done for you.”

The other current present in the thinking of some people on religious rituals is that they objectively effect certain results. They are needed by the gods. They bring about certain results independent of the status of the mind of the worshipper.

People who take this view talk of rituals in the following style:

(a) Suppose I or my family is suffering from a particular harm (dosam) say, for example, Sarpadosam, in that case Sarpa-bali (offering to the serpent) is necessary. Skin diseases, appearance of snakes in one’s compound are believed to be sarpadosam. A piece of red cloth (chop-oppikkal) is to be offered to Bhagavati if the affliction is from Vasuri-mala (goddess of smallpox). When the trouble is from the spirits of the dead, cock sacrifice is necessary. Any harm from an evil spirit can be countered only with a vazhipad (offering) to Karimchamundi.

Again, if we want our wishes to be fulfilled pujas to particular gods or goddess have to be offered. For instance, for the birth of a child, for wealth, Bhagavati is to be worshipped in special ways. This means the saktis are placated by these rituals.

(b) We fail sometimes to obtain what we want because there is an obstacle (vignam/mudak) for it. We consult the astrologer (kanisan). He tells us the nature of the vignam by means of prasnam. He then prescribes Ganapati homam, or choppu oppikkal. The obstacle may be due to the position of some planets like Rahu or Ketu. But they can be removed by special rituals.

(c) Sometimes saktis like Potten teyyam, Vishnu murti, Kuttichattan ask through their komaram (dancer) etc. for certain ceremonies to be done for them.

(d) Gods show sometimes certain signs asking for nerccha, utsavam, etc. “I understood,” said a Pulaya, “through my child’s peculiar gesture (chesta) that I was to celebrate tira (festival) to Potten teyyam. I felt so since I was a believer”.

People who talk like this believe that saktis are pleased by the rituals. They use phrases like “puja vidhikal kondu sakti priti undakum”; “Homam/namajapam tapas adiyaya anusthanangal kondu daivangale santoshipikkam”; “vrata tantra vidhikal kondu sakti prasadam undakam” i.e. puja, Homam, namajapam tapas, vratam and such other prescribed religious rituals cause the gods to give their favour. If the desired wish is fulfilled, they believe that the gods are made happy. “Agrahicha karyam sadhichengil, santosichu ennatinnu adayalamanu”; “Daivangal santosichengil karyangalkku oru mudakavum undakuvella.” If the gods are pleased, there won’t be any obstacle to our affairs. Stories of different favours received were related by people who had obtained the saktiprasadam. Failure to obtain the favour, however, would be interpreted differently. Either they would say that the “Bhagavati”⁵ is not pleased, or one’s time is not good, or one has no vidhi for it.

These two distinct styles of speech about rituals should not perhaps be attributed to two distinct groups. Perhaps the wise thing may be to say that these two strands are present in the consciousness of ordinary people in different degrees and that the same people may act differently in response to different rituals at different occasions. However, it looks as if there are some people who refuse to attribute to rituals meaning ex opere operato and interpret rituals solely in terms of personal experience of values and meanings.

D. Moral values and traditional practices of purity and pollution (Suddhi and Assuddhi) go into the making of their God-conception.

People in Chirakkal, just like any other common folk in India, talk of their gods getting angry and punishing them. Stories of the gods’ anger and punishment either from the Puranas or of local origin, form part of their religious consciousness. But if we try to understand what is meant by their talk of gods’ anger, we will discover a basic belief in them that Daivam is to uphold the moral law. Daivam destroys the wicked (dustanigraham) and protects the good (sistaparipalanam). In other words, the tales of gods’ anger in popular Hinduism are understood primarily in terms of moral demands on man.

The following answers were given by people when they were asked to explain what they understood by stories of gods getting angry.

(i) “Daivam is without beginning or end. He is without emotions. But according to the Puranas, Bhagavan has come as Rama or Krishna to uphold dharma and end all forms of injustice (aniti). Avatars are bhavams of the Sakti of Bhagavan. Their duty is destruction of the wicked (dustanigraham) and protection of the good (sistaparipalanam).”

(ii) “Iswaran is saccidananda swarupam. It has no anger. It is ever in love with the world. As avatar it shows the feelings of man since the purpose of avatar is to destroy adharma and protect dharma. The Puranas help us to understand the meaning of life.”

(iii) “According to the Bhagavad Gita, Bhagavan takes avatar to protect Dharma. Kamsan was killed by Sri Krishnan and Hiranyakasipu by Narasimha avatar for their wickedness towards the people. The anger is against adharma. Bhagavan shows mercy to his devotees.”

(iv) “Just as man, Daivam becomes angry at man’s wicked acts and happy over his acts of worship and virtuous deeds such as alms-giving (puja karmangal and danadharmangal). Avatar Daivam comes to kill the wicked and protect the good. Anger is against adharmam.”

(v) “Bhagavan takes avatar when adharmam increases. The opposition to adharmam is manifested in anger. The real form of Bhagavan is saccidananda swarupam and nirguna-bhavam. But as avatar he shows feelings proper to that particular birth (janmam). The Puranas are treasure houses of knowledge. Many stories go to show that only niti and dharmam are permanent, not adharmam.”

(vi) “One day man must suffer the fruits of his pride and wickedness. Man is punished for his evil deeds. It must be coming from Daivasakti as described in the Puranas.”

(vii) “Daivam gets angry if wrong acts are done. It means that people will have to suffer for theft, lies, deceit, etc. This is interpreted as Daivam’s anger.”

(viii) “The Puranas tell the story of the struggle between the good and the evil (nanma and tinma). They are written in a poetic style in the language of devas and asuras.”

(ix) “Man has to pay for untruth and evil deeds. If satyam and maryada are violated, the result is affliction. It is interpreted as Daivam’s anger.”

From the answers of people quoted above it is abundantly clear that in the religious consciousness of ordinary Hindus, Daivam is a symbol that undergirds their moral values.

However, a careful reading of the answers show two styles of speech. One is to interpret punishment of the wicked as an act of Daivam, the other is to speak of it as an automatic law of karma.

What is papam or adharmam?

Whether it is the symbol of God, or the symbol of the law of karma that supports the moral values of individual Hindus, the question of what is morally right or wrong has a certain relativity according to the times. For example, the moral sensitivity of Hindus who lived some two hundred years ago believing in sati, human sacrifice, child marriage, etc. is not the same as that of the Hindus of today. Their conception of justice and ideas about property rights, etc. were not the same as those of today.

Therefore, people were asked to describe what they understood by papam/adharmam and punyam so that we may have a general idea of people’s thinking about what is morally right and wrong. Their answers are given below.

Papam

What is papam? People were asked. Everyone without exception gave general descriptions like, “Deliberately and unnecessarily hurting (upadravam, vedana) harmless creatures both men and animals (jivi, prani) and acting against the interests of other people. But we can fight against the adharmam of others and retaliate against the wrongs done to us. Some gave the example of the killing of the Kauravas which, according to Sri Krishna, was no papam. In general they said that a thought or word or deed that gives pain to others is papam (sin).

Some of the specific instances of papam that people mentioned are: “not paying due wage”, “not returning loans”, “not helping others when one can”, “not looking after one’s parents and children and wasting money on alcohol”, “taking undue profit in business”, “misappropriation of others’ property”, “stealing”, “deceiving others”, “breaking a promise to marry a girl or similar betrayal”, “envy”, and “calumny”.

About ten people wondered, since life involves exploitation of others, whether it would be possible to live without committing sin in one form or another.

Some considered all killing and causing pain, whether it be to animal or to man, as papam, while for the majority killing animals for food was not sin. It is at the most, a necessary sin. Harmful creatures like snakes, and insects like mosquitoes could be killed.

Punyam

In their description of Punyam three types of acts were referred to. A pravritti (an act) done for the benefit (upakaram) of others is punyam. Iswaravicaram, observance of vratam, tozhal, vazhipad, tirthayatras are punyapravrittikal. But the mind must be suddham and these acts should be accompanied by acts of danadharmam. We have to do good to others without desiring any favour in return. Helping the poor (sadhukkal) was repeatedly mentioned as punyapravritti. Other specific instances were danadharmam (alms giving), feeding the hungry, caring for the sick, controlling kamam and moham.

Some explained punyam is the merit-reward Iswaran gives for our salkarma i.e. good acts done to others (upakaram). In this sense also the word is used in Malayalam.

God-conception and the traditional practices of purity and pollution (Suddhi and Asuddhi)

People understand the kopam of gods not only in terms of moral values but also in terms of certain ritual practices of purity (suddhi) and pollution (asuddhi). For instance a story was told of a man who suffered burns while walking with other Komarams in the fire. In the prasnam, Bhagavati asked, “do my children have to eat his leavings?” It is said that the man had consumed a piece of coconut while he was preparing the dish for the festival. Similarly, certain categories of people such as a woman in her periods, a woman after child birth, members of a bereaved family, consider themselves ritually impure. They do not perform a religious exercise, say for instance, lighting the evening lamp (*deepam). They are not to take part in sacred functions at home or to visit the temples or shrines of gods.⁶

There are also people among the high castes who believe that the entry of lower castes into their temple would render it impure (asuddham). A story was told by some of how a Manyani Nair family in Chirakkal had to give away their shrine to a Tiyya as he was found in it, lighting the lamp before the deity. In another story some Tiyya men were struck dead by cholera because they entered the Kottiyur temple. Some of the interviewees also complained that the sakti of their gods is diminishing because of the fact that offerings (nerchas) are accepted from Pulaya women, and that the items for the offerings to the gods are bought from Muslim shops. One of the interviewees also said that the oracle (velichapad) of Mucchilott Bhagavati did not enter his sister’s house as she was married to a Tiyya. There also prevails the practice of not allowing widows to take part in important sacred functions.

Another traditional practice observed in the name of suddhi of gods is vegetarianism. For instance, people like Komaram, Ayattan, Velichapad who act as the medium of gods, and people who go on pilgrimages should observe a strict vegetarian diet and abstain from sexual pleasure.

It is also believed by some that the ritual bathing (abhisheka) of the idol with water, milk, curd and ghee is done for reasons of ritual suddhi. The idol is believed to become polluted (asuddham) because of the darsan of many impure people.

From all these examples it is clear that the traditional institutions like pula, namely pollution, connected with birth, death and menstruation, discrimination against lower castes—particularly Harijans, prohibition of inter-caste marriage, prohibition of widow marriage, and vegetarianism are based on an underlying notion of purity and pollution which is defined with preference to the gods. For instance, the pula at the time of birth, death, menstruation is marked by the ritual inability of those affected by it to perform any religious acts to their gods; the Pulayas are considered to be the most impure and they are also the most unworthy to act as santikaran to the gods of other castes; the different castes (jatis) keep their identity by means of their gods and these gods do not enter the houses of people of mixed marriages; the vegetarian meal is a pure meal and that is the meal acceptable to the gods of the higher castes; widows are inauspicious and they are not to participate in the auspicious rites done before gods. In short, purity practised by people is understood in terms of what is pure to their gods. Violation of this invites their anger. In other words, their ideas of purity are built into their conception of God. The talk of His purity is the talk of their purity. He is the basic symbol that supports all their purities.

If an attempt is made to understand the pattern of the reaction of people in relation to some of the traditional practices of suddhi in our culture, namely, how people these days view the traditional practices in our culture such as pula, i.e. practices of purity and pollution at the time of birth, death and menstruation, prohibition of inter-caste marriage, non-vegetarianism, prohibition of Pulayas to act as priests, etc., we will find that the concept of suddhi in relation to these traditional practices is differently understood and practised by Hindus. This fact once again proves that the content of their God-conception is not uniform and it undergoes certain changes accordingly as the value system changes in our culture.

E. The reasons for which people worship their gods

One of the most common misconceptions among Christians is that popular Hindu worship is a kind of bargain. Ordinary Hindus offer something to their gods in order to get something in return. This is actually a caricature of their religious consciousness. We conveniently ignore some of the basic religious attitudes of the ordinary believers and judge them by part of what we see them doing.

From the answers of people to questions such as: What is the aim of your prayer and worship? Why do you visit the temple? etc., it is clear that some of the basic reasons for worshipping the gods are the same as those which make them believe in a Para Sakti. For instance, people will say that God’s help or blessings (Daiva Sahayam/Daiva anugraham) is necessary for life. It is with God’s help that our life goes on. Everything would happen according to Daivam’s plan. Prayer to God helps us to walk in the right path (nervazhi) without pride (ahamkaram). It is a dosam not to remember Daivam. Neglect of practices like tozhal (prayer) might lead us to live without fear of God (Daiva-bhayam) and lead us to acts against God (Daiva-dhikaram). On the contrary, practices like tozhal help us to get closer (adukkan) to Daivam.

Another important and the most frequently mentioned reason for prayer and worship is to get peace of mind (mana samadhanam, asvasam). We have seen above that the fact that prayer is answered makes people believe in God. It is in this context some of their felt needs like ‘cure from disease’, ‘marriage of a daughter’, ‘job’, etc., do appear in their prayer. It arises from their religious belief that God answers prayers. For visiting temples there are other legitimate considerations, such as ‘to see the festival (utsavam)’, ‘attend a marriage’, ‘meet friends’, ‘accompany the women folk’ (wife, mother, sister), ‘for spending time (santosam, nerambok)’. But these are to be understood in relation to their total religious consciousness.

Some of the answers of people are given below which give us an idea of the basic attitudes in the worship of gods, as well as to other reasons which prompt people to pray and worship:

1. ‘I believe that a sense of God (Daivavicaram) is good. The blessing of God (Iswaranugraham) is necessary to our lives. It is also a pleasure (rasam) to see places like Guruvayoor, Sabarimala.’
2. ‘Tozhunnat (prayer) is good. It helps in life. I pray so that my life may proceed without difficulty.’
3. ‘I go to temple to pray (tozhan) and meet friends.’
4. ‘To fulfil an offering (vazhipad) that had been promised. Show children the festival (utsavam).’
5. ‘To give first rice to children, meet friends, to see the cultural programmes (kala paripadis).’
6. ‘I pray so that my life may proceed without much difficulty. I believe that Mukamiamma will help me in this; to give first rice to children.’
7. ‘I go to temples to do the rituals (chadang) that are to be done. Daivam’s Sakti is in the world. It is necessary to think of it.’
8. ‘Visiting temples is punyam (virtuous act). I pray for protection from illness and bad times.’
9. ‘Visiting the temple is a good habit (nalla silam). It is a tradition (mura) we follow.’
10. ‘I pray asking for Daivasahayam.’
11. ‘I pray for deliverance from poverty and ill-health.’
12. ‘I go to temples to see utsavam (festival) and to fulfil the nercha (promised offering).’
13. ‘I visit temples for santosam (to feel happy) and give offering (nercha). When I have rupees ten or five I feel like going to Parassini.’

F. Attitudinal changes towards the symbols of Faith

In popular Hindu religious consciousness the experience of the sacred is mediated not only through the many gods such as Siva, Vishnu, For instance, it is believed that there are among living men incarnations or realizations of the Divine such as Sai Baba, Sai Sankar, Santosh Mai, Mayamma and countless others. Popular Hinduism also has god-dancers who act as god’s vehicles of communication to man. Then again there is the cow, the nagām, special trees, rivers and planets which are known for their sacred powers. All these form part of the sacred symbols of the Hindu faith as it is lived today.

Empirical evidence from Chirakkal suggests that these traditional sacred symbols do not mediate one religious meaning for all people. For instance, while some people believe that Sai Baba is an avatar of Bhagavan, others consider him a clever magician or a confidence trickster. While some Hindus hold that Aswatha vriksham (Arayal) is the symbol (Samkalpam) of all gods, that Tulasi is Lakshmi, that Ganges is Vishnu, others say that they have learnt in school that such expressions in our language are “remnants of old nature worship”. How can we worship the moon they ask, when the Americans have landed on it? Fire walking by Teechamundi teyyam (god) is considered “big fun” (tamasa) by them. His urachil attam (possession dance) does not impress them except for its aesthetic value. Anyone, they say, can do it with some courage.

G. The Pattern of Changes in the Understanding of Concepts like karmam, samaya dosam, rebirth, of evil spirit

These are key concepts in the Hindu religious tradition with which ordinary people interpret their experience of joy and suffering and give structure and shape to their time and space.

Here again empirical study of these concepts—in Chirakkal, reveal that these Faith categories are used by people only in areas and situations in their lives which cannot be interpreted in terms of logic and reason. But the pattern is so varied that we cannot speak of any uniform and static meaning for these concepts.⁷

II. Personal Reflections on Popular Religious Consciousness in the Context of Hindu-Christian Dialogue

1. Does the popular Hindu religious experience allow itself to be described in terms of classical Hindu philosophical systems such as Advaita Vedanta, Visishta Advaita, Dvaita, etc.?

I have given in Part I A a general outline of the way in which the majority of Hindus in Chirakkal tend to describe their religious faith.

The style of speech described there speaks of the people’s belief in a Para Sakti whose presence pervades both man and the universe. It suggests that man is in some kind of an evolutionary process. It also speaks of the benefit man derives from the upasana (worship) of this Power.

The question may now be asked: Is this type of consciousness an Advaita frame of mind? It may appear to be very much so until we are made to doubt it when we hear them talk about their experience of “divine grace”, “divine guidance”, “divine favour”, “divine anger”. These ideas do suggest that the Sakti in which they believe is capable of blessing them and destroying them, capable of responding or not responding to their prayer, capable of being pleased or displeased with them. Hence it appears that an ordinary Hindu would say that he and his God are not two but he worships his God as if they are two, i.e. he is monistic in speech and theistic in worship.

Here I should mention the exceptions to the majority position described above.

(a) People, though a few, who describe their religious faith in the explicit idiom of Advaita Vedanta and identify themselves as advaitins.

(b) People who in their conversation use such terms as Jivatman, Paramatman, Prakriti, Purusha, Antaryamin etc., which reminds one of particular systems of philosophy but they cannot be identified with any one particular system as they are not following any system as such.

(c) People who give a vivid impression of conducting themselves in the “living presence” of a Reality other than themselves whom one likes to describe as theistic.

(d) People who describe the religious reality as a world of many powers each independent of one another.

All these groups of people more or less share a common set of beliefs such as doctrine of karma, purity and pollution, astrology, mantravadam etc., and have common symbols of worship whether they be gods, ancestors, sacred animals, trees, rivers etc. and common festivals and practices.

In the light of all these facts it seems to me that it does not make much sense to think of Hindu-Christian dialogue in terms of classical Hindu philosophical systems as far as the general popular religious experience is concerned.

2. Basic similarities in the perception of human condition and common religious experiences

I have described above the reasons which make an ordinary Hindu adopt a religious outlook in life. They are: the experience of the wonder of the universe, the sense of helplessness of man to shape his own destiny, the fact of prayers being answered, the feeling that the righteous will be rewarded and the wicked punished, the knowledge that religious faith gives man the power to change his life-style, personal experience of the guidance of a Power, the fact of the ancestors’ belief, personal faith experiences, the need to hope for a life after death, the belief that gods have shown signs and the fear of punishment.

I am inclined to believe that these basic experiences that compel a Hindu to accept a religious dimension to his life, equally apply to Christians. Perhaps some Christians may express reservations about new signs coming from God asking for festivals and offerings. But the tradition of new signs coming from Heaven like Lourdes and Fatima is not entirely strange in Church history. Even in Protestant circles one finds people opening the Bible expecting a sign. But only an empirical study among Christians can reveal how they stand vis-à-vis their Hindu brethren on this point.

3. Hindu-Christian Dialogue to evolve a common value system: Problem and Possibility

Our study of the moral consciousness of Hindus in Chirakkal shows that in popular experience the moral values have a religious basis and legitimation. This basis and legitimation is sometimes expressed through the medium of the symbol of God⁸ and sometimes through the medium of the concept of karma.

We have also seen from the analysis of the practices of purity and pollution among the people that the traditional understanding of these conceptions is with reference to their gods. Some of these practices of purity, we have seen, involve social discrimination against people, namely women, widows, Harijans and other castes connected with the ritual removal of pollution.

A general description of the content of the moral sense of the people is given in the first part. But when we study their moral attitude in relation to these socially discriminating practices, we find that some Hindus reject the traditional religious undergirding of these practices of purity while integrating social values like freedom and equality into their conception of God. For instance, while some Hindus do not want Harijans to enter their temples, there are others who organize Harijan visits to temples of the high castes. While the gods of some communities refuse to enter the houses of individuals married outside that community, there are gods who approve and bless inter-caste marriages. While some Hindus deny the Harijans the right to choose the profession of temple priests, aspiration to make them priests is growing among other Hindus. While there are young Hindu men and women who ignore the stars and follow their personal will in marriage, there are others who are guided by the stars in wedlock and in every other important detail of their lives. While some support a fast unto death to protect the cow, others defend its slaughter in the name of secularism. It means there are two types of Hindus in India. One type understands itself and its identity solely in terms of religious traditions of the past. The other understands itself not only in terms of traditional values but also in terms of the values of freedom, justice and equality which India has set for itself to build its future.

It means that the core symbols of God and karma which provide the moral basis to Hindus do not mean the same thing for all Hindus in terms of moral and social values. It means that as far as the social and cultural values are concerned there is no uniformity in the God-conception and God-experience of Hindus.

On the other hand, we know there are Christians in this country who practise social discrimination based on caste though the Christian experience of God as recorded in the New Testament does not support it. It means that the Christian experience of God in this country is conditioned by its traditional social organization.

These empirical facts go to show that whatever people like to believe about the eternal truth of the symbol of God in their respective traditions, the actual experience around this and other religious concepts are socially and culturally conditioned in terms of values and meanings. It also means that in a country like India where different religious traditions and ideologies interact, where people share common language habits and social customs, the division of people as Hindus and Christians with a distinct conception and experience of God may not be very legitimate. It also means that there can be people who belong to different religious traditions having the same conception and experience of God in terms of social values and meanings.

In our approach to dialogue we have not taken note of these problems and possibilities as our approach to dialogue with Hinduism is too historical and static. We rely too heavily on the written historical traditions of one another forgetting that dialogue has to take place between people based on their living experience in these traditions. We have said above that analysis of the living religious experience of Hindus suggests that the key religious concepts are reinterpreted by some of them according to the changing experience of life today, in India, caused by a multitude of reasons. In Hinduism, where anubhava (experience) is a central pramana (authority) in religious life, where the meanings of key religious concepts are not historically defined by an external institutional authority, this situation is very natural.

But here we should remember that this dialogue is to be meaningfully conducted at the point of growth in the living present which is centred around some people and movements within Hinduism and where there is no dialogue with Hinduism as such in general. But the real problem here is that people who are at the point of growth in their God conception and experience in different traditions, fail to find a common historical religious symbol to rally round it as a religious group, and have to appear as humanists or secularists before society.

This predicament of religious versus secular, divine versus human is largely the result of a type of thinking by which we organize and categorize our every day life experience into a sacred and non-sacred mould. We will now analyse how Hinduism and Christianity stand in relation to this sacred-non-sacred division in the conception of reality.

It is seriously claimed that in Hinduism there is no sacred-profane dichotomy. This may be true if we look at it only from the point of view of some of the Hindu philosophical systems. But it is not true if we look at it from the point of view of worship and ritual. Hinduism does divide time, space, people and objects into sacred and profane in its effort to symbolize the religious reality. For example, there are auspicious and inauspicious hours, days and months for rituals and performance of other important functions. As for space, it is not only that temples, shrines and pilgrim centres are considered to be sacred in character but also that the degree of the sanctity differs within sacred space itself; for instance, the garbha grha is more sacred than the inner courtyard of the temple. Among the people there is not only the division of castes according to their relative purity understood in relation to the gods, but also the priestly class itself is hierarchically divided according to the nature of their sacred function. Lastly, in Hinduism there is the conception that some objects like mountains, rivers, trees and animals share the sacred quality and they are made objects of worship.

In the Christian tradition there have been two tendencies. Generally speaking one is represented by the Catholic and Orthodox Churches and the other by the Protestant Churches.

In the Catholic tradition the transcendent is symbolised by a sacred-profane conception of God and world in its worship and ritual. The liturgical festivals, division and gradation of church space, pilgrim centres, the priestly class with its permanent sacred character, sacramental symbols effecting the real presence of God and objects like holy water, medals etc., mean a division of human existence into a sacred-non-sacred pattern.

The Protestant tradition, emphasizing the Christ-event in history, conceived human history as evolving into a God-centred reality, wanted to get rid of the sacred-profane division of time, space, people and objects by conceiving all of the time, space, people and objects sacred with the result that no portion of these could be set apart as specially sacred. The Protestant tradition has tried to abolish the sacred hierarchy of time, space, people and objects.

It follows from this that at least from the point of view of ritualistic division of time, space, people and objects as sacred and profane, the traditional Hinduism and the Catholic Church agree, and Protestantism is opposed to this view. But our empirical study shows that there are Hindus who are influenced by this Protestant spirit appearing to them as the modern outlook. There are, for instance, the Hindus who do not believe in the real presence of gods in temples, who use rituals as mere symbols of worship and who understand the worship of gods primarily in terms of personal moral and social values.

It may therefore appear that the spirit of Protestant Christianity and modern Hindu outlook in Hinduism can, theoretically speaking, meet to abolish the kind of mythical and hierarchical division of time, space, people and objects; in other words, the dichotomy of sacred-profane conception of human experience. But they cannot solve the problem of the absence of common religious symbols. They can however perceive the so called secular symbols as religious.

Notes

1. Here it should be understood to mean their progenitors, Swamijis, Scriptures and their heritage in general as they refer to these particular sources in their answers. ↩
2. Beliefs in signs from gods is present not only among simple folk who worship less known deities but also among the high caste people. ↩
3. Sthalamahatyama of Sri Mukambika, Guruvayoorappan, Sri Venkateswara etc. claim this type of special manifestation. ↩
4. Other concrete namas will be used e.g. Muttappan. ↩
5. Proper names of some god will be used. ↩
6. People tell stories which speak of the necessity of observing the rules of purity and pollution. One such story is about "Uppan". This bird is believed to be a woman under a curse. Her mistake was that she in her periods came into contact with some of her relations going to the temple. ↩
7. A detailed account of these points will be found in my forthcoming book on popular religion in Chirakkal. ↩
8. "God" here should be understood to stand for all the common and proper names with which they point to some power other than themselves. ↩

📄 This page was created on 27 October 2026. You can view its history on GitHub, preview the fileTip: Press Alt+Shift+G, or inspect the underlying source.