365betÓéÀÖ

The Importance of Devotional Groups and Prayer Halls in the Evolution of Hinduismtc "The Importance of Devotional Groups and Prayer Halls in the Evolution of Hinduism"

In our country in every town or village we have Prayer Halls where devotional groups gather to sing in chorus in praise of god. What is the history behind them? What is the relationship between these and other traditional practices of worship in Hinduism?

What are the main stages in the evolution of the Hindu religion? The Vedic rites come first in our religion. These rites were not within the reach of ordinary people. Performing Yagna (ritual fire-sacrifice) was possible only for the rich and the well-to-do, not for the simple folk. That is why we read in our story books that these Vedic rites were undertaken by kings and rishis who were financially aided by kings. Further, they were often meant for the fulfilment of prominent person’s wishes and desires who undertakes to perform the rites. Often they were not intended for the spiritual or worldly benefit of the populace. For, instance, kings who desired to beget sons performed �Putra Kameshti� or the yajna for sons. Similarly for other desires. Some yajnas were performed to celebrate the king’s victory. After establishing his suzerainty over other kings through his might in arms, the king duly performed Asvamedha (horse-sacrifice) or Rajasuya (challenge to other kings) ritual. This was a common practice among rulers in the Vedic times.

It is well known that the Hindus did not develop a national identity as the westerners did. To some extent our religion is responsible for it. Our religion, instead of promoting nationalism, has promoted self-aggrandizement and caste-aggrandizement. With this narrow out-look came into vogue some practices and religious rites.

It is possible to suspect that the Vedic practices were perhaps among the magical devices to invoke and control natural forces by the ancients. Yaska was the foremost among those who rejected the authority of the Vedas. By the Upanishadic period, it seems to be well established that Vedic rites were not valuable for spirituality. Because they often involved blood-shedding. the Buddists and the Jains had denounced the rites.

In course of time several modifications altered the nature and form of the Vedic rites, and they became non-violent. The form of the rites might have changed but the motivation behind did not. What was the motivation? To bring prosperity and welfare to an individual or to the community, to bring fulfilment in worldly aspirations. That was all, and it did not encompass the society as a whole, to inculcate character or bring development in people; national interests were not at all the goal.

The Vedas developed in two directions. One was Purva Mimamsa way � in this, Yajna and Homa rituals were important. Some held the view that these rituals were self sufficient to produce results, without the aid or the ground of other forces. They held that the Vedas were not products of the human mind and went to the extent of denying God’s existence, and said that even if there was a God, He was only a witness and not the originator. If God were to be accepted as the originator of the rites, then it cannot be logically argued that the rites alone will yield the desired results. If there were to be other ways also alternatively then the importance of the rites will diminish. Thus the extremists who pleaded for the rites and rites alone became atheists, like the scientists of the modern age.

Almost every religion has to face this baffling dilemma: if God exists, then how can there be total effective power in a certain manner of action and behavior on the part of man? When a particular act or ritual is performed, is God bound to bestow the desired result? If He happens to be bound that way, how can He be independent and all powerful? If He is not all powerful, but bound by rites, how can we believe that pursuing a righteous path in life will simply ensure our welfare in daily life? In that case, instead of following the ritual and trying to establish a rite for His grace and benefits, as though He was not free and all-powerful, we could as well approach Him straight away and by praising Him, worshipping Him and surrendering at His feet, in the way of Bhakti or devotion, receive His unbounded compassion. Wouldn’t that be a better way? This is the basis for the Bhakti or devotional way to God.

After the way of rituals, the way of knowledge or Jnana became prominent in Hinduism. This is Uttara Mimamsa. Minding the deficiencies in the way of rituals, enquiries came up; what is God? What is Nature? What characterizes the Self? And, what is the relationship among the three? These enquiries belong to the way of knowledge. The deficiency of these enquiries lies in the fact that they don’t yield total satisfaction to man. Man is full of desires and to seek to fulfill them is his nature. How can philosophy fulfill desires? Therefore in scriptures like the Bhagavadgita it was sought to establish that eschewing all desires is Moksha or liberation. If there should be no desire, how are rites and duties to be performed? In answer it is said that they should be done without desiring the results. Both for living the worldly life and for liberation, action must be without being desirous of the results! What about these two “fors� � living and liberation � are they not expected results?

Therefore, the two ways that came up in practice as cults are only (a) the way of rituals without God and (b) the way of devotion to God. In these two ways there are again two modes � the personal mode and the group mode. If a single individual for his own purpose performs rituals or worships God, either himself or through a priest it comes under the first mode. This is an ancient practice among the Hindus. Even among the westerners and the Muslims this mode prevails, and no religion could be an exception to this. But along with this personal mode the group mode too came. When we compare our worship in temples with that of the Christians and the Muslims in Churches and Masjids, the difference becomes clear. When we go to the temple to conduct worship through the priest, inviting the people of the village for the worship is one convention. But in the process of worship only the name and the family lineage of the head of the family are mentioned, invoking prosperity and wealth, longevity and children for him alone. The others are not mentioned by the priest in his prayer to the deity. Oblations like coconut and flowers are offered by the head of the family and not by the others. There is no group singing in praise of the deity. Just as in Vedic rituals during Yajna, the role of the Ritvik is played by the priest of the temple, who recites the text from memory. This is the Hindu mode of worship � it is a personal approach to the deity through the priest.

Among the Christians and Muslims, the mode is different. At a set time all members of the community gather at the place of prayer and worship as a group. When the priest recites the refrain of a verse, the entire group repeats it aloud in one voice and thus offers worship not only indirectly but also directly each person addressing God. This is done in unison with the others. That way, the individual and the group are undifferentiated almost every day. A daily repetition strengthens the group identity and hence in them social cohesion is strong. In us it is very much lacking. When the Muslims want to agitate on some public issue, they make the Masjid a convenient place for this purpose. We do not have such places for coming together. The westerners consider the nation as foremost and caste only as a part of it and act accordingly. This difference in temperament, it must be noted, is reflected in the respective modes of worship.

This weakness of the Hindus was detected and sought to be overcome by leaders among whom the foremost was Guru Nanak, the founder of Sikhism. Nanak was a Punjabi. Every year and at every place the Hindus suffered defeat in their fight against the Muslims and were further humiliated by them in disgusting and unspeakable ways. Their weakness and incapacity to protect the honour of their women was witnessed by Nanak with intolerable grief. For the misery of the Hindus, lack of social cohesion among them was the root cause. Understanding this, Nanak in the religion founded by him gave prime importance to group chantings. Thus, he strengthened the Sikh community, which was able to defeat the Muslims. When in 1924, I was sent by Gandhiji on a political mission to Punjab, I noted and deeply inquired how the Sikhs had developed social cohesion which was absent among the Hindus. Through the Akali disciples and their leaders who were my friends, I could gather many facts. The main thing was their mode of worship. The Sikh temples are very small. In the main temple and the sanctum sanctorum, such differentiations do not exist. The temple is just one room. This hall can accommodate about 150 to be seated closely on the floor. Otherwise, the place is not very spacious. In this hall assemble all the men and women of the village once in the morning at five thirty or six o� clock and again in the evening at seven or eight. This is specially ordained by their religion. The priest reads or sings from the Adi Grantha. Whenever there is a musical refrain in the prayer song, it is voiced by the entire assembly in unison. After that there is Bhajan or group-chanting attuned to thambura and maddela. For the chanting they repeatedly use God’s names in his praise. After half an hour of this they disperse on their personal errands. This is the root cause for the invincible social cohesion the Sikhs possess.

Guru Nanak grasped the secret from the Muslims and tried to inculcate the practice in our countrymen through his religion. Earlier there had existed this mode of worship in Hinduism too, but it did not take root as a prominent mode of worship as it did in the case of the Sikhs. If it had taken root, the Hindus would have overcome their lamentable state long ago.

What are the main features of group-singing among the Hindus? (a) The Gods worshipped are Rama and Krishna, who are very dear to the hearts of the common people. Even between the two, Rama Mandirs predominate. These Gods are like ordinary men who have experienced pain and pleasure like us. They do not belong to the privileged caste. One was a Kshatriya and the other Sudra. (b) The mode of worship is singing in praise of the lord by all people in unison. There is no ritual and no bathing of the idol in milk and water. There is no scent of the Vedas however much you may try to smell it. There are no priests and so this mode of worship is convenient for the common people. Further this is done by the community in union as a group, devotion oriented. It is like nectar for the people. If only they have the sense and the inclination to drink it.

In the path of devotion the priest is out of place. For rites like Yajna and other allied ways of worship the priest is a key-person. Devotion is an unmixed emotional and mental attitude. In this Yoga of Bhakti, magic spells and their particular intonation, special purification are not included. The social mode of this Bhakti Yoga is the devotional group.

In the prayer halls, there is no distinction between the sanctum sanctorum and other sections as in a temple. Every one is seated on a basis of equality. God or deity is not untouchable. He is common and is easily accessible to all. Here every one can go to the picture of the deity and place garlands of flowers without any one’s interventions or mediation. Incense can be burnt as an offering by every devotee. In fact, lighting a lamp and burning incense are imitations of the temple ritual. They do not strictly belong to the mode of devotional singing and chanting. It’s main feature is singing the praise of God in complete unison by all the assembled. Other things are only additional and not strictly relevant. In temple, the worship is full of ritual. A devotional-hall or prayer-hall is not an annex to the temple. It is in a way different from the temple.

Among the various stages of evolution the Hindu religion has gone through, the devotional group singing has come last, and it is the best of all stages and changes showing ripeness. But our bad luck has pursued us even in this. In several villages a Brahmin priest is appointed for this devotional worship! Should every good crop be afflicted by a pest? The appointment of a Brahmin priest strikes at the root of the concept of group worship. When I was a boy my father had organized a devotional group in our village Cattamanchi. But no Brahmin was present. Generally they don’t attend. Gradually, for some reason or other, villagers gave up this practice of group-worship and devotional singing. The most important feature of group worship is singing the praise of God together as a group. If that is missed then it’s very purpose is defeated. When a priest intrudes and starts reciting verses, as in a temple, the prayer-hall loses its significance.