top of page

By:

Someshwar Gurumath

17 December 2024 at 9:53:55 am

The Sacred Speaks for Itself

To understand a Devata requires not just intellectual freedom but familiarity with the traditions and lived experiences through which the sacred is encountered. The term “Devata” evokes bhakti, reverence, ecstasy, surrender, and a profound emotional experience (bhāva) that transcends intellectual understanding. Unlike the Abrahamic conception of “God,” “Son of God,” or “Prophet of God,” the Hindu Devata is inseparable from the land, sacred geography, collective memory, narratives, temples,...

The Sacred Speaks for Itself

To understand a Devata requires not just intellectual freedom but familiarity with the traditions and lived experiences through which the sacred is encountered. The term “Devata” evokes bhakti, reverence, ecstasy, surrender, and a profound emotional experience (bhāva) that transcends intellectual understanding. Unlike the Abrahamic conception of “God,” “Son of God,” or “Prophet of God,” the Hindu Devata is inseparable from the land, sacred geography, collective memory, narratives, temples, and lived experience. Savarkar describes the Hindu civilizational domain as “Ā Sindhu-Sindhu Paryanta”—from the Indus to the seas. Its Devatas are deeply rooted in this sacred terrain: Rāma in Ayodhyā, Kṛṣṇa in Ayodhyā, and Hanumān in Kishkindha, associated with Hampi–Anegundi. Śiva and Śakti likewise permeate Bharat, with the Śakti Pīṭhas preserving sacred memory through geography. In nearly every region of Bharat, one can find a temple, tīrtha, narrative, festival, sacred hill, river, or local tradition linked to Rāma, Kṛṣṇa, Śiva, Śakti, Hanumān, or another Devata. These Devatas are not abstract entities detached from the geography of Hindu civilization; rather, they are tangible personalities of devotion, whose presence is experienced through this geography and the communities that have maintained these traditions over generations. The land itself becomes sacred through layers of memory, worship, pilgrimage, and devotion. Central to this sacred imagination is Bhāratamātā—Bhārata as mother, as sacred land, and as an ancient civilizational presence. A notable strength of Hindu civilization is that the sacred is encountered not solely in an abstract theological domain but throughout the land itself. The Devata resides in the bhāva of the devotee, within the temple, the tīrtha, the narrative, the festival, and the memory of the civilization. Consequently, these Devatas cannot be regarded merely as convenient metaphors for an interpreter's preferred theory. They are integral to a living civilizational world, which must be approached with respect above all else. Unique Integration An additional dimension of the Hindu conception of Devata lies in its diverse ways of divine manifestation and human encounter. Devatas may be experienced through avatāra, darśana, worship, ritual, mystical experience, or intimate relationships with devotees. This does not deny divine encounters in other religions but highlights Hindu civilization’s long coexistence of multiple forms of divine presence. The śaraṇas, Nāyaṉmārs, Āḻvārs, and saints recount deeply personal encounters. Bedara Kannappa’s complete surrender to Śiva is believed to have prompted divine manifestation through the liṅga. Śrī Rāmakṛṣṇa Paramahaṃsa’s experiences with the Divine Mother similarly illustrate Devata as tangible presence, prayer, guidance, and relationship. The Hindu perspective integrates the concept of Devata as both a personal entity and a cosmic force. For example, Śiva and Śakti can be perceived as divine figures and as significant metaphysical entities. In Hinduism, there is no requirement to choose between viewing the Devata as a personal presence or as a cosmic principle. Contemporary discussions on consciousness have examined human experiences of perceived divine or unseen voices. Julian Jaynes's contentious bicameral mind theory suggests that ancient humans might have interpreted internally generated voices as those of gods. Although this theory remains a subject of debate and cannot be considered definitive evidence of divine communication, it highlights the necessity of acknowledging the complexity of human consciousness when evaluating such experiences. Hindu civilization presents a distinctive relationship with Devatas as an ongoing engagement rather than mere remembrance. Devatas are spoken to, sung to, offered food, carried in processions, visited, celebrated through festivals, and remembered across generations. Whether understood as theological truths, mystical experiences, or psychological phenomena, their civilizational significance remains undeniable. The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and SDG 11.4 emphasize preserving cultural, religious, and spiritual heritage. This raises a vital question: should enduring traditions first be understood on their own terms before being reinterpreted through external frameworks? The inquiry extends beyond identifying who possesses the authority to interpret a Devata. A more profound question arises: who holds the adhikāra to discuss an ongoing relationship experienced by millions? Forms of Adhikāra To speak of adhikāra is not to deny anyone the freedom to study or critique Hinduism. But can one claim the authority to define a Devata without understanding the philosophical categories, sacred history and lived traditions through which that Devata is experienced? Modern scholarship itself recognizes positionality—that an interpreter’s location and relationship to a community can shape its representation. Likewise, śāstra, sampradāya, sādhana, upāsanā, lived practice and reverence may provide different forms of adhikāra. Freedom of speech gives everyone the right to express an opinion, but freedom to speak is not the same as adhikāra to interpret. We do not own or appoint the Devata, nor decide what the Devata must become to satisfy our theories. If Ayyappa is understood as a Naishṭhika Brahmacāri, that tradition cannot simply be dismissed for convenience.
And perhaps this is where the Hindu understanding of adhikāra takes us to its most profound conclusion. We spend our time asking who has the authority to interpret the Devata, who is qualified to speak about the Devata, and who can claim the right to define the sacred. But in the Hindu understanding, the ultimate adhikāri is the Devata Himself. We do not appoint Him. We do not define Him. We approach Him—with bhakti, with śāstra, with upāsanā and with surrender. And when the Devata chooses, He reveals Himself; when the Devata chooses, He manifests; when the Devata chooses, He speaks. The stories of our saints and devotees are filled with precisely such moments of divine revelation. Therefore, perhaps the true adhikāra is not the confidence to speak over the Devata, but the humility to listen to Him. We may interpret, we may question, we may study—but ultimately, the Devata remains the final authority. And perhaps that is the deepest lesson of a civilization that has lived with its Devatas for millennia: we do not possess the sacred; the sacred possesses us. (The writer is a Bengaluru-based author and scholar. Views personal.)

Government creating obstacles in people celebrating Eid freely: Akhilesh Yadav

  • PTI
  • Mar 31, 2025
  • 4 min read

Lucknow: Samajwadi Party president Akhilesh Yadav on Monday alleged the BJP-led government was creating obstacles in people celebrating Eid freely, and accused the ruling party of flouting the Constitution and undermining democracy.


"The biggest threat today is to democracy and the Constitution," Yadav told reporters outside Aishbagh Eidgah on the day of Eid. "And I am saying this with full responsibility', even though I shouldn't have to, ?that the BJP is not running the country as per the Constitution."


Yadav alleged the BJP government was creating obstacles in people celebrating Eid freely. He pointed to heightened security measures at Eidgahs and mosques, claiming they were excessive and unnecessary.


"You all have been covering Eid for years, but have you ever seen such large-scale barricading before?" he asked. He also claimed that police deliberately stopped his convoy for half an hour without any valid reason.


"When I asked why I was being held up, no official had an answer. What should I call this? Dictatorship? An undeclared emergency? Or an attempt to intimidate us so that we don't attend events of other communities?"


Yadav also recalled how his father and SP founder Mulayam Singh Yadav had first brought him to the Eidgah, and since then, he had been visiting regularly. "But this time, the excessive security seemed designed to prevent people from celebrating their festival and following their traditions," he alleged.


Addressing a question on his recent remarks about cow shelters and dung, for which the BJP has criticised him, Yadav hit back, saying, "Who knows more about cows than us? Those putting up posters and debating on national TV should actually work for cow protection instead of just talking."


He challenged the BJP to disclose the actual number of cows and bulls in government shelters, alleging that the ruling party deliberately avoids accountability.


"They won't tell you how many animals died at the Maha Kumbh due to the floods, nor will they explain where the allocated budget for cow shelters is going," he said.


Yadav further accused the BJP of "using distractions" to avoid addressing real issues such as rising unemployment, inflation, lack of investment in Uttar Pradesh, and failing healthcare facilities.


"They want to hide corruption, their 'Ease of Doing Corruption', their 'Ease of Taking Commissions', and their 'Ease of Doing Scams'," he remarked sarcastically.


Without naming him, Yadav also took a swipe at suspended IAS officer Abhishek Prakash, who is facing corruption charges, suggesting that the officer was being shielded by the BJP.


"I have information that the missing officer is actually hiding in the Chief Minister's residence," he claimed.


Continuing his attack on the BJP, Yadav also responded to recent remarks made by BJP MLA from Loni, Nand Kishor Gurjar, saying that the legislator was not attacking his own party but merely challenging officials.


"He has only said, 'If you have the courage, prove me wrong'. Maybe he feels insulted or is in distress, which is why he reacted in anger," Yadav said.


"Just think about it. This is a BJP legislator questioning government officials and reminding them of their loyalty. Now, it's up to the officials and the government to respond," he said.


Yadav also supported West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee's recent remarks, asserting the BJP was running a smear campaign against her, "just as it had done in Uttar Pradesh".


"What Mamata Banerjee is facing today in Bengal is exactly what the BJP did in Uttar Pradesh. Now, they are using the same dirty tactics in Bengal and Bihar," he alleged.


He further claimed that journalists were well aware of the situation but refrain from speaking out. "You all know the truth, but I understand that you won't say it openly," he told reporters.


When asked about Kanwar Yatra processions blocking roads, Yadav avoided getting into the debate. However, on the issue of land ownership laws, he pointed out a contradiction, "Right now, a person from Uttar Pradesh cannot buy land in Uttarakhand. People should think about this."


Taking a jibe at Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath, he added, "I hope he (Yogi) also moves to Uttarakhand."


Shifting to a serious tone, Yadav accused the BJP of manipulating constitutional provisions for political gain. He criticised the removal of Anglo-Indian representation in Parliament and slammed the implementation of the Goods and Services Tax (GST). "They claimed GST would help traders, but look at the reality. ?Businesses are suffering, inflation is soaring," he said.


He also attacked the BJP's demonetisation move, alleging that corruption had only worsened.


Referring to the case of suspended IAS officer Abhishek Prakash, Yadav remarked, "This entire controversy was not about commissions but about distribution. If the share had been settled properly, there would have been no FIRs."


Yadav accused the BJP of taking decisions solely for political gains rather than national development. "If demonetisation and GST were truly beneficial, then why does the government still need to provide free rations to 80 crore people?" he asked.


"The government itself cannot explain the per capita income of these 80 crore people."

Comments

bottom of page