My view: India (Bharat) is for Indians of all religions as well as no religion; India is NOT, and should NOT be, a Hindu rashtra (nation)

Last updated on 8th Nov. 2019

As an Indian citizen and resident, my view is that India (Bharat) is for Indians of all religions as well as no religion. India today is NOT, and should NOT become, a Hindu rashtra (Hindu nation). It is a country for Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists, Zoroastrians (Parsees) and other religions as well as those who prefer not to be associated with any religion (atheists).

And my deep belief is the teaching of Shirdi Sai Baba, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sai_Baba_of_Shirdi, which is "Sabka Maalik Ek". God of all (Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists, Zoroastrians and other religions, as well as atheists) is One!

Atheists may not believe there is a God but God exists irrespective of the disbelief of atheists - that's my firm belief. I should add that in my view, Indian atheists should be completely free to be atheist, and I respect those Indian atheists who are good law-abiding citizens of India.
---------------------

Given below are some comments of mine (slightly edited) from my associated Facebook post:  https://www.facebook.com/ravi.s.iyer.7/posts/2621852404697987 :

In response to a comment, I (Ravi) wrote:
Agree with most of what you have said. One difference in my case is that as I am a writer on spirituality & religion (and also on other topics), I publicly write about faith. And that does create some issues at times. But I believe it helps (including helping me) more than it creates issues.
----

In response to a comment, I (Ravi) wrote:
Invasive proselytization is bad and can cause offence. I avoid that like the plague.

Amicable discussions on faith conducted in a loving manner where one shares one beliefs and experiences, and also doubts & difficulties, with ***interested people*** are good. That becomes a satsang and tends to be helpful. I readily engage in such discussions when I have the time and find the matter to be of interest.
----

In response to a comment, I (Ravi) wrote:
Yes, I have had a few encounters with aggressive proselytizers of some faiths in person, and have usually chosen to move away and avoid further contact.

But I should also say that I have viewed/studied articles/speeches of such proselytisers and have gained some insights from them. E.g. Rev. Billy Graham. Now that does not mean I accept everything that Billy Graham said or did, especially any part about Christ being the only saviour and that those who deny Christ have a bad future. I ignore stuff like the latter. But on love of God, power of prayer etc. I have found inspiration from articles/videos of evangelical preachers like Rev. Billy Graham.

Joel Osteen is a current day evangelical preacher. I have found some of what he says to be inspirational.

And, of course, I find Pope Francis to be very inspirational. But, of course, I reject any Christ is the only way part of his speeches.
----

In response to a comment, I (Ravi) wrote:
Well, it is hard to know the reality of each individual preacher. And then we all have our flaws.
Another aspect is that, after study of ashram/ministry life, it is clear to me that there are two roles involved in top ministry/ashram leaders whether Christian or Hindu (don't have enough exposure to other religion ministries and so am not saying anything about them). One role is that of a preacher. That is a vital and absolutely necessary role. If the ashram/ministry leader is not a preacher then it is difficult for the ashram/ministry to be spiritually inspiring.

Note that Hindu temples are different from ashrams. The temple focus is on ritual which gives benefits to those who visit the temple and pray to the deities there. The temple focus is not so much on preaching though they do have some discourses by preachers at times, which visitors to the temple may attend.

Back to ministry/ashram top leaders. The other role of these leaders is financial, administrative and people management of their institution. I think this could be termed as the political role. In more informal terms, they are Chairman and CEO of their XYZ Inc. ministry/ashram. And this is an important role too, as if they don't manage this decently, they will not be able to maintain any premises, facilities for visitors like accommodation, food, books & media etc. and (maintain) paid staff to manage their premises and facilities. In other words, if they fail as Chairman and CEO of XYZ Inc. ministry/ashram, the ministry/ashram goes into bankruptcy and just disappears over time (like bankrupt companies disappear over time).

When I read/view articles/videos by these top preachers, I focus only on the preacher role and largely, if not fully, ignore the political/administrative role. They interpret scripture and they try to relate it to life in our times. I find some of their interpretations to be very good.

Now they may not be practicing all that they preach in their individual life. Well, so long as it is not proven that they are big hypocrites, I am willing to give them the benefit of any doubt.

Most critics focus on their political/administrative leader role and find fault with the institution they head and lay blame on the preacher as the top guy. I just avoid getting into that aspect of it unless the preacher is directly doing some bad stuff which is proven (e.g. sexual abuse).

To conclude, I try to gain from the positives of the preaching of these preachers, without getting into a critical examination of whether the preacher & his/her institution is perfectly following all the preaching. Others may find such an approach unacceptable. I am fine with others having that view. But I continue to benefit my way.
----

In response to a comment, I (Ravi) wrote:
Noted your view.

Note that many times, in cases of allegations of a preacher not practising what he/she is preaching, it is only allegations, and not proven. After having seen and experienced to a little extent myself, in the past few years, how dirty slander is used in competition between spiritual groups, now I firmly believe in the principle of innocent until proven guilty by a competent fair authority like a court of law or an unbiased and reputed inquiry committee. [As you would know, but I felt it appropriate to mention it here, I was attacked with a smear campaign by Facebook fake Id fellows of MDH group as (all false) being two-faced (acting as a supporter of trustee but actually being a conspirator against him), being a Lab. Assistant in the Sai university and being a paid sidekick of a trustee of Central Trust for my social media work exposing Muddenahalli group.]

In some cases, of course, such allegations against preachers are proven or admitted by the preacher, in which case, the preacher's reputation takes a big hit.
----

In response to a comment, I (Ravi) wrote:
Well, what I have realized from my study of history of religion, is that such dirty politicking was ***far worse*** in the past. Jesus Christ was accused of sedition by the group that felt threatened by his rise. The Roman governor of the area (Judea), Pontius Pilate, saw that it was a faction fight and tried to avoid punishing Jesus Christ for sedition (crucifixion was the punishment for this grave crime), but was forced to do so. If I recall correctly, Pilate washed his hands symbolically after the judgement, as an attempt to distance himself from the matter! But he had given the judgement and so Jesus Christ was crucified - a horribly violent punishment aimed at utterly humiliating and dehumanising the person, and sending a message to all about what would happen to them if they followed that person.
----

In response to a comment, I (Ravi) wrote:
Humans are also animals :-). Some are able to rise above their animal impulses and become noble. Some are able to use their power, in animal fury to much greater destructive effect than a non-human animal can.

Sad that you have lost faith in all organized religions. I take the good from organized religions and reject the bad.
----

In response to a comment, I (Ravi) wrote:
Interesting to know your views. I do believe in divine revelations though I understand that some of them may not have been captured well enough in scripture which are transmitted across generations by men, most of whom do not have the gift of divine insight/knowledge. I also understand that most of the revelations have to be understood in the context of the times in which they were made, though some are very abstract and so are valid for all contexts (e.g. Tat Twam Asi Mahavakya in Chandogya Upanishad).

Regarding your statement about religions being used to divide us: I think groupism and tribalism are part of human nature. Religion is one important factor that comes into play in such groupism and tribalism. But even if you remove religion, groupism and tribalism in human society does not go away. More on it later on in this comment.

Animals can also be very groupie. E.g. a bird of a different feather can be cast out ***ruthlessly*** by a flock of birds.

Regarding your statement about religions causing more bloodshed over the centuries than any other belief system: I think that is a somewhat mixed up statement, as I think religion has always been part of human society in recorded history till communist ideology got adopted by large communities of people. Yes, India has records of atheism in ancient India (e.g. Charvakas, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charvaka). But I doubt whether there were Charvaka kingdoms where only Charvaka philosophy was followed by most, if not all, of the kingdom's citizens. I think Charvaka would have been limited to a philosphical elite in certain places in ancient India but with bulk of the people still having some religion (Hinduism, Buddhism or Jainism).

So one can say that there has been horrible bloodshed across the centuries and millennia of human history. But I don't think one can say that religion was the cause of all that bloodshed. It is tribalism and groupism that's the main cause of such bloodshed with religion being one of the factors for such tribalism & groupism.

And then comes the shattering blow to the religion is the cause of bloodshed argument in our times, as we see that in the 20th century, the major bloodshed came from horrific wars of World War I and World War II besides Vietnam and Korea and Afghanistan wars, and horrific purges in authoritarian regimes, most of which did NOT have religion as a cause (Afghanistan was a case of occupation by communist Russia which was resisted by religiously inspired freedom fighters, and so a slightly mixed case). Nazism, Stalin led communist rule in Russia, Mao led communist rule in China, North Korea's communist rulers - most have horrific purges running into millions (except perhaps North Korea where it may not have got into millions as its size is small). World War I and World War II casaulty is in tens of millions!

I think in the 20th century there has been much more bloodshed in countries ruled by atheist ideologies like communism than in countries having a majority of religious believers!

Surely, in our times of early 21st century, one cannot say that religion is the cause of great bloodshed! Some bloodshed yes, but I think casualty count of non-religious wars (e.g. Iraq & Afghan wars), and drug cartel killings and gang killings so far in our early 21st century would be much higher than casualty count of religious extremism related wars and riots.
----

In response to a comment, I (Ravi) wrote:
Thanks for your response. I agree with your general point of view that human beings are more greedy than animals, and are more exploitative of other beings than animals. I don't know whether that is down to human nature vs. animal nature or simply because human society's knowledge and technology permits humans to be more greedy than other animals and more exploitative of other beings than animals.

Powerful and dominant animals (male typically) can get very nasty and exploitative when it comes to mating rights, though. I have read up some stuff on that.

I found your view that atheism is also a religion to be very interesting and somewhat amusing! Some of what aggressive atheists do is quite like aggressive preachers of religion!

If humans disappear from the face of the earth, I think most other species will prosper (except, as you pointed out, those that are dependent on human help to survive and breed). But I think it will be more of jungle life rather than a Garden of Eden.

What some Hindu spiritual masters teach is that humans have an ability to understand divinity to some extent, and to spiritually evolve. My understanding of Vedanta (influenced by Sathya Sai's explanation of it) is that our awareness/consciousness/Atma is the divine essence and that it is eternal and that all our Atmas are connected as one single Paramatma (let's call it superconsciousness/super-awareness). However it is only the spiritually elevated who can experience that their consciousness is the same consciousness in others. It is through this kind of experience that spiritually elevated beings have paranormal capabilities like knowing what's in the mind of other people. Most of us (including me) have not had such spiritually elevated experiences and our experience of life is limited to our consciousness and our mind-body complex.

Further, spiritual masters say that once a person gets elevated spiritually, he/she may acquire certain miraculous powers like creation/manifestation of material stuff when they will it.

I think they also say that animals, in general, lack the innate ability to evolve spiritually like humans do.

I believe these words of spiritual masters. So I do believe that humans are more innately gifted than animals, when it comes to understanding divinity and mysteries of creation. In particular, I have heard Sathya Sai say "Jantunaam narajanmam durlabham" quite a few times, in his discourses that I have heard live in Sai Kulwant Hall.

Here is a related extract from a Ugadi 2002 discourse of his, https://www.sathyasai.org/discour/2002/d020413.html:
True celebration of Ugadi lies in giving up evil qualities and purifying one's own heart. The human heart in its pristine state is highly sacred and human birth is difficult to attain. Janthunam narajanma durlabham (out of all the living beings, the human birth is the rarest). Having attained such a precious life, man is not making efforts to live a true human being. Today, he has become a bundle of desires. He is beset with desires and craves for their fulfilment day in and day out. He is under the mistaken notion that fulfilment of desires will confer happiness on him. He should realise that only annihilation of desires will lead to ultimate bliss. True happiness is the state of desirelessness.
--- end extract from Sathya Sai discourse ---

I view such teachings of Sathya Sai as very wise teachings for spiritual aspirants like me. Living up to these teachings is a struggle for guys like me who still have many human flaws. But I don't doubt what he has said above, and what he has said above is in line with Hindu spiritual teachings over the ages.

So the human birth, I believe, is sacred and difficult to attain, and I believe that the human being has some innate gifts which can help him/her evolve spiritually. But whether the human being utilizes those innate gifts or not, is a different matter.

I think some human beings ignore such innate gifts that they have and lead lives where they are full of desires and to fulfill those desires they exploit other human beings. That is tragic and sad.

But that does not mean that all human beings are like that. There are few human beings who spiritually evolve and give hope to many other human beings that they too can evolve.
----

In response to a comment, I (Ravi) wrote:
Thanks for your views. No issues with me at all, that you disagree with Baba's view on Jantunaam Narajanmam durlabham, which I believe in.

About not wanting another human life: From my belief perspective, this is where it gets into tricky territory. We may not so easily control if and how we are reborn. My belief in this regard, as per Hindu scripture and which was re-iterated by Baba, is that Karma decides if and how we are reborn. And so need to be careful to avoid doing bad karma as bad karma may result in a rebirth which involves suffering as consequence for negative karmic actions we may do in this birth. But you may not hold this belief and that is fine with me, again.

Genuine paranormal abilities are different from magician's tricks. A magician may appear to produce something out of thin air (though typically they don't do mind reading tricks as that I think will be difficult for magicians to do). That is different from manifestation or transference of an object that a master with paranormal abilities does, or the mind-reading power that the master may have which he may reveal at times. You may not believe the master's paranormal abilities. That's again fine with me. No issues. I have firm belief that Baba possessed paranormal abilities.

And so, I do believe that accounts of miracles performed by masters of various religions in their scripture, may very well be true (e.g. Jesus Christ's miracles of healing, multiplying food and walking on water). You may not believe such miracles mentioned in scripture. Again, no issues that you don't believe it.

We simply need to be aware of our different views and beliefs on such matters.
----

In response to a comment, I wrote:
Thanks for your comments. I find it to be stimulating to have this conversation with you. Don't worry about any rambling. I am into rambling :-).

Good to know that you believe in Karma. Good to know that you have no reason to doubt Baba's paranormal abilities.

Good to know that you value his service to humanity over so many decades, and that you value lakhs/millions of his devotees finding succour in following his teachings and becoming better humans.

It is my experience since 1993/94 when I first associated with Sathya Sai devotees/satsangs that the biggest thing is the bond of devotion that devotees have with him. They ***pray*** to him. That is a very, very vital part of the Sathya Sai devotee sangham, in my considered opinion. Yes, they also make attempts to follow His teachings but I think some slip up here and there (I certainly do slip up here and there).

But even for Baba, as per his own words, the big thing is the bond of devotion between devotees and him. I have been fortunate to experience how Baba would be moved by prayer and request of devotees. It was an extraordinary thing. I had not seen anything like that anywhere in my life prior to my coming to Baba. Perhaps that's because I had led a different life earlier. I mean, I had seen and experienced great devotion towards the statue or photo of a deity (e.g. in ISKCON whom I greatly appreciated then and continue to appreciate now for their devotion to Krishna). But this was to a walking, talking person (Baba)! But I had not been with other living Gurus and so maybe that's why the experience was so astonishing and amazing and wonderful to me.

The biggest gift I have received from Baba and the Sathya Sai sangham (who were inspired by Baba) is the gift of faith in divinity (various deities: Sathya Sai, Shirdi Sai, Jesus Christ, Krishna, Rama, Narasimha ...)!

Perhaps today you may not have the kind of faith that I have been blessed to have through the Grace of Baba. If so, I pray to Baba that he grants you that faith. It is a ***great*** gift to have.

About getting what you deserve: Well, that's at least partly true I think based on my faith and understanding of Karma. And yes, sometimes the karmic reactions happen in the same life itself (once again that's my belief; I do not have any paranormal powers to know the way Karma is operating). But earnest prayer to a deity can soften negative karmic consequences in a way so that the person goes through it but can bear it more easily. Baba would say that God can make it like anaesthesia given before an operation; the person goes through the karmic reaction but does not feel it (much). I have firm belief in such words/revelations of Baba. He was a super-powerful spiritual force while in his body, and I am sure continues to be a perhaps unseen force today.

Interesting thoughts about Karma for animals. I have not really thought about this angle.

I would not be able to have such convos on smartphone :-). I am just way too slow on it. I guess I am an oldie when it comes to smartphone user generation :-). So I do almost all of my social media stuff on good old desktop with a great Microsoft Comfort Curve (full feature QWERTY) keyboard.
----

In response to a comment, I wrote:

My prayers for success, and best wishes to you, in your quest to find your answers and your (spiritual) anchor.

----

In response to a comment, I wrote:
In my considered view, based on my spiritual journey of a few decades (from early 1990s to now), from philosophical interest in Hinduism (and other religions) but lack of devotion, to now being well entrenched in my devotion & faith in God (though I still have my human flaws, like most devotees have) along with philosophical interest (that continues), I find words like crutch/support system to be very poor choices for describing the power of prayer.

Today I believe that Lord Narasimha emerged out of the pillar at the earnest prayer of Prahlada, and killed his father, the powerful demon Hiranyakashipu who was tormenting Prahlada for being a devotee of Narayana!

But then I think you may be in initial stages of your journey on faith in God and in the power of prayer to invoke God's power to help the devotee. And so words like crutch may appeal to you - btw atheist preachers tend to use such words but usually to mock people's faith in God. I know that you did not intend it in that sense but that's how it may get viewed by others. Prayer is very powerful when it is earnest and full of faith in God and God's power to intervene in human life.
...
And bro. no offence intended :-). I was just trying to be as truthful as I can in this important matter, as I think such truth may help.
----

In response to a comment, I wrote:
Satsang with staunch devotees increases and strengthens faith in God. In the initial stages of my Bhakti journey I associated with ISKCON Juhu, Mumbai by visiting them on Sundays/holidays and reading their literature. I was amazed by the depth of their devotion. .... Even today while I don't physically visit ISKCON temples/groups, I virtually visit them through watching youtube videos, and feel the strong depth of devotion vibes from the videos! They are awesome in the depth of their devotion to Krishna.
...
The Ayyappa devotees who wear Mala are also quite amazing in their devotion to God. I enjoy interacting with them and seeing them while they are with Mala. Many of them are simple folk but sincere in their devotion, especially when they wear the Mala (and practice the related worship routine and austerities).
---
-----------------------------------------------------
On my associated LinkedIn post, https://www.linkedin.com/posts/ravi-s-iyer-13a55310_sai-baba-of-shirdi-activity-6589837344227065856-GMwk, a person commented in part that "A true Hindu Rashtra resepcts, accomodates and celebrates all faiths and beliefs including atheists. That was what India (was) before (-) many faiths freely moved and propagated."

I responded:
I think ancient India was for more complicated than that. There were Jain kingdoms, Buddhist kingdoms, Hindu kingdoms of various flavours, ... If one goes to a past before Buddha and Jainism (note that Jains say that there were many tirthankaras before Mahavir), perhaps there may have been primarily Hinduism of various forms but that is just too too far back in the past for posts like the one I put up.

So there was no single Hindu rashtra in the past two to three thousand years of Indian history that encompassed the whole of India. ... And there was a lot of competition between religions like Buddhism, Jainism and Hinduism (prior to Islam entry into India) to convert kings & so their kingdoms to their religions. Adi Shankara is said to have revived Hinduism by reducing the practice of Buddhism and Jainism then. And at least some of that would have been rather forceful. So even before Islam in India, tension between religions in India like Hinduism, Jainism and Buddhism seems to have been not uncommon.
----

In response to a comment, "My dear Ravi this is an excellent view.", I wrote:
Thank you --Name-snipped-- mami! It is what I have learned from the teachings and practice of my beloved Gurudev(s) Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba as well as Bhagavan Sri Shirdi Sai Baba.
----