"Listen, O lord of the meeting rivers,
things standing shall fall,
but the moving ever shall stay."
(Basavanna)
I read these lines in an article one day and couldn’t stop thinking about it. I wrote it down, moved on to other things, came back to it again. Eventually found this book from the 1970s; translation of poetry by saints in medieval South India, belonging to a religious movement. That was my first impression and unsurprisingly enough, I retreated. Not unimpressed, merely uninterested.
The lines came back again. Who is this lord of the meeting rivers? And even more importantly: how beautiful are the next two lines?
I went back.
Ramanujan's book consists of an introduction to Virasaivism - the protest movement against established religion; translations of "vacanas" composed by saints of Virasaivism - not poetry, but the free verse "rejection of premeditated art"; notes to accompany the translations; and an appendix on a six phase system of classification for this "poetry". With these, it includes another appendix by William McCormack on the lingayat community and the Virasaiva culture in Mysore in mid 1950s-1960s.
Virasaivism embodies the intensely personal relation between the god and the one who believes. Such is this relationship, that the Virasaiva saints have different names for the god as one would have beloved nicknames for someone they love. For Basavanna, the Lord of the Meeting Rivers is the lord who came to him at the sangam or the meeting of the rivers. For Allama Prabhu, Lord of the Caves is the one who came to him in a cave he found at a difficult period in his life. What I call the coming of the God is that moment I imagine when they realized, that moment of awareness, the moment when the conflict disappeared and belief took its place. These names are not for a Siva but for the Siva that they found, not the one found in chantings and rituals performed by others, or the books and the temples. The inertness of an universal, detached God is lost and the vitality of one's own God is gained.
More than anything else, this is what speaks to me the most. A few of my favorites:
The rich
will make temples for Siva.
What shall I,
a poor man,
do?
My legs are pillars,
the body the shrine,
the head a cupola
of gold.
Listen, O lord of the meeting rivers,
things standing shall fall,
but the moving ever shall stay.
(Basavanna)
To the utterly at-one with Siva
there's no dawn,
no new moon,
no noonday,
nor equinoxes,
nor sunsets,
nor full moons;
his front yard
is the true Benares,
O Ramanatha.
(Dasimayya)
I'm the one who has the body,
you're the one who holds the breath.
You know the secret of my body,
I know the secret of your breath.
That's why your body
is in mine.
You know
and I know, Ramanatha,
the miracle
of your breath
in my body.
(Dasimayya)
True faith is perhaps the simplest of all, and this simplicity is perhaps the hardest. Thus the Virasaiva saints reject the temples, the priests, the formulaic rituals. Ramanujan writes:
"such traditions symbolize man's attempt to establish or stabilize the universe for himself. Such traditions wish to render the universe manipulable, predictable, safe. Every prescribed ritual or magical act has given results."
Simplest and hardest of all: having faith, is replaced by the easy, vacuous 'x done at y while using z is the surest way to God.'
The six phase system of classification is remarkable. Ramanujan speaks of it as the stages or phases of the relationship between the believer and their God. Each vacana by a saint gets categorized into these phases based on the state of mind it embodies. Interesting here how Basavanna has more vacanas in a particular stage at the beginning and Allama Prabhu has more, nearly half of all his vacanas, in another stage towards the end. Mahadeviyakka breaks free from these stages, and her vacanas do not categorized as per the system. This is further proof of the personal nature of their relationship.
At the same time, Ramanujan recognizes that to the believer the "six stages may only be a manner of speaking of the unspeakable, an ascent on the ladder with no rungs."
I categorise Ramanujan's and McCormack's work differently because they feel like two different worlds, and not just temporally either. Ramanujan's exquisite rendering of the free spirited, spontaneous, personal and raw philosophy of Virasaivism of medieval south India is vastly different than McCormack's objective account of Lingayatism post 1947 that seems to me to be no different than Brahmanism - the very thing it originally claimed to reject.
I almost wish I had not read this essay, although it is important to know how the ideals get translated in the real, 'ordinary' world. There is also a point in the essay where McCormack writes of "Gandhi, a mahatma, or a religious figure, (who) led the first drive for nationhood" - which makes me sceptical. Gandhi may be revered as though a religious figure but he isn’t one. I can make this distinction because I know the background, which makes me suspicious of other such phrases that he may have used which aren't what they apparently mean.
I have had the good fortune of not having parents who doused me with rituals and beliefs since I was a child. This is mostly because they have an incredibly personal approach to religion themselves, and that allows them to not feel the need to shove beliefs down my throat. This upbringing gave me something I treasure the most: the ability to look at religion the way an outsider would, with the capacity and willingness to try and understand the essence of what it means the way an insider would. Which makes this book the most rewarding for me in recent times.