This article was written at the time of the statement of Shankaracharya
SHANKARACHARYA ON SAI BABA
Let me confess at the outset that I am
not a follower of Sai Baba, but I have reservations on the views expressed by
Sri Shankaracharya Svaroopanand Sarasvati Svami Ji. Shankaracharya said that
worshipping Sai Baba was a conspiracy to divide the Hindus. Sai Baba should not
be worshipped as he was a human being and not a God, and his temples should not
be built. The Samadhis (burial place) of Saints
or Sannyasis are being worshiped and this tradition is in vogue since the time
immemorial. In Sri Vaishnava Sampradaya (Tradition) of Sri Bhagavad Ramanuja,
the Samadhis of Saints which are known as Brindavanams are being worshiped
since the time not known to History. And the methods of Brindavanam worship are
also enshrined in scriptures. In Madhva Sampradaya also the system exists. The
famous Mantralaya, a place in Andhra Pradesh on the bank of River Tungabhadra
situated on the borders of Karnataka, is the holy place where the Samadhi of a
renowned Madhva Saint is located. In the Advaita Sampradaya, which was
established rather brought to light basing Vedic system also has a practice of
worshiping the Samadhis of their Saints. This system is followed by Sringeri Sri
Sharadapeeth and Kanchi Sri Kamakotipeeth etc. This system is being followed by
a number Sampradayas established or advocated in India by various Hindu
Religious orders. The Samadhi of Saint Sai, which is at Shirdi also being
worshiped by his followers. When this is the case, How Sri Shankaracharya
opined like this? Even all Shastrajnas (who studied Shastras) would not have
any objection for Sai System of worship. At the time of religious blow, when
others are accusing the whole Hindu religious system, one should not object the
system of worship that is being followed by a group of devotees. We must
satisfy our selves even if we have any reservation against a system of worship
that the people instead of going against the Hindu religious Faith, at least
follow some kind of religious system.
If
Sri Shankaracharya says that Sai is not a Saint, then who is Saint. What is the
description for Saint? Shastras talk about the Fourth Institution (Hermithood)
i.e. Tureeya or Sannyasa Ashrama among the four Ashramas prescribed, which
categorically states about renouncing worldly desires including one's Family.
At the same time the aspirant of Sannyasa Ashrama cannot leave or renounce his
Family all of a sudden. He has to make arrangements for the livelihood of his
Family, and then only he is permitted to leave his Family. In certain exceptional
cases, there is exemption for this rule. Hence, who is Saint, for this; there
is no 'this & that' definition in Shastras. Sri Shankarachrya reportedly
said that In Sanatan Dharma (the Eternal Faith), there are said
to be 24 Avataaras (incarnation) of Lord Vishnu. In Kalyuga, there is no
mention of other Avataaras than Kalki and Buddha. Hence, Sai Baba can
certainly be not an Avataara, and Sai Baba should not be considered a
guru and an ideal because he was a non-vegetarian and advocated the practice of
circumcision. Simply because a person was a non-vegetarian and the follower of
circumcision, one cannot deny his preaching to be followed or prevent the
followers from worshiping Him. We Hindus also follow non-vegetarianism in
performing Yagas (Sacrifices) and getting the Prasada of the Yaga-shesha (the remains
of sacrifice of Yaga). Followers of Sai do not adopt circumcision, though it
might have been advocated by Him. In this circumstance, how can Sri Shankaracharya claim that
Sai was not a Saint or Guru? And Sai did not belong to a path of Faith. If Sai
belongs to Hindu path of Faith, then it is the right of Sri Shankaracharya to
say something about Him. If Sai did not belong to Hindu path of Faith, where is
the right of Sri Shankaracharya to opine on this issue? Even If Sai belongs to
Hindu path of Faith, it cannot be claimed that Sri Shanakaracharya alone has
right to opine. There are other systems of Hindu Faith; the followers of such
system have equal right to express their views. As the case is like this, How did
Sri Shankaracharya who supposed to preach peace and welfare of the Society
opine like this and create chaos and turbulence in the society. Is this the
Sainthood rules or orders prescribed in Shastras? If so, he can do so. But as
far the Shastras are concerned, they do not prescribe such violent or
disturbance or discriminative preaching.
If
Sri Shankaracharya says that Sai is a human being and not Avatara. Yes it is
true that Sai was a human being and not Avatara of God. And He neither claimed
that He was a God nor an Avatara of God. If the Devotees regard Him as God and
Avatara of God, then it is not the fault of Sai. For instance, Sri
Shankaracharya Svaroopanand Sarasvati is also worshiped by his devotees as
Avatarapurusha or even a God. This is not the fault of Sri Shankaracharya. For
not worshiping Sai as their God or their Messiah by the followers of Islamic
Faith cannot prevent worshiping Sai by the followers of Hindu path of Faith. It
is a personal issue of the followers of a certain Faith. Further,
Shankaracharya reportedly said that Sai Baba used to say Sabka Malik Ek
Hai (God is one for all). If so, why do Buddhists and Jains worship separate
gods? if Sai said that there is only one God; it is
his personal opinion, by this How did the Jain and Buddhist followers bound? There
is no logic in this argument. It is the faith of the followers of particular
Religious System to accept or not a particular preaching according to their Faith.
We Hindus neither accept the System of worship or System of philosophy of
Islamic Faith nor Chritianity, because those are against our Hindu Faith. Likewise,
Buddhists and Jains do not agree with the preaching of Sai, hence, they do not
follow his preaching. Further, Sri Shankaracharya said that the
followers of Sai Baba should stop worshipping Lord Rama, taking holy bath in
river Ganga, and chanting Har Har Mahadev. The
followers of Sai system of worship can neither be prevented from worshiping Sri
Rama or Sri Krishna nor taking a dip in Ganga nor chanting a name of God,
simply because they worship Sai. This is not the preaching of our Shastras.
Moreover, Shankaracharya stated that the building of Sai temples would come in
the way of building Sri Ram temple in Ayodhya. One cannot prevent the
construction of Sri Ram temple in Ayodhya just because of the increasing number
of Sai temples in India. Hence, this is the apposite time that Saints in a
responsible and revered position shall not engage in giving such statements
that hurt the feeling of the followers of a particular system of worship. They
should hold their tongue and realize their position in the society and their
responsibility.
*******
1 comment:
shobhanam
Post a Comment