Maithili is the language of Mithila, a cultural region of two historical dynasties in the North-Eastern part of India but no longer a distinct political entity. According to Grierson, it lies to the north of the Ganges, to the east of the Gandak river, to the west of the Kosi river, and to the south of the Himalayas (thus falling primarily in the Indian state of Bihar but including some territory in Nepal).
Harimohan Jha, known as renaissance man of Mithila, wrote the book “Khattar kakak tarang” in 1948 and discusses about many things from food behaviour to dharmashastra to veda to philosophy to character of various gods to various cultural idioms of mithilanachal. His view are also very diverse as feminism, scientific temper, rationality, class and caste etc are prevalent in his writings. In the preface, Harimohan Jha describes the protagonist of the book khttar kaka as being named neo-charvak by the local people. Khattar kaka sees everything with a doubt and applies inquiry to find the logic behind it. He calls it 'tarkvaad'. He is highly versed in Vedas, Upnishads, Dharmashastra, Jyotish, Ayurved, Mahakavyas and other sanskritic texts. He does not believe in rebirth, salvation, dharma, god etc. Despite the thing that writer introduces him as neo-charvak, he is different from the ideal notion of charvak. He does not believe in the transcendental notion of karma but he tells people to do right work to achieve right end. He rejects the dogmatic beliefs in pooja, yagna, abstract indoctrination of daily life and establishing god and getting divine approval to make text infallible. For him, nothing is infallible and every knowledge is temporary. Any trustworthy new knowledge has the capacity to replace old knowledge. The conception of abstract absolute is problematic for him.
He also believes in the classification of knowledges and seperate boundaries for different forms of knowledge. He shows clearly in the chapter of Ayurveda that how a scientific domain had been invaded by poetry of sringar rasa and this lead to destruction of scientific notion of Aayurveda. Aayurveda, which started on scientific base turned into false, superstitious and contradictory text. Aayurveda writes if any women during her menstrual cycle takes the roots of lakshmana with milk, mixed by umnarried girl in pushya nakshatra then she will certainly get pregnant. So, he asks what is the cause of pregnancy- the roots of lakshmana or pushya nakshatra or the hands of unmarried girl or all three. He also cites other verses which give references to get son. So he says that this has turned into superstition and it is no longer science so it declined.
He also attacks the ideal characters of religion like Ram, Pandavs, devtas/gods and says us to judge the ideal connotation attached with them. In the chapter Ramayan he attacks the Maryada Purushottam notion. Being a Maithil, he is also attached to Sita, the Mithilaputri. He finds the story of Ramayan as the story of betrayal, anti-women and irrational behaviour of father-son duo. why sita was sent out of the ayodha after passing the agnipariksha? Was it a kshatriya dharma? Was cutting nose of surpnakha was kshatriya dharma? He also says that the name given to Yudhistar, dharmaraja, is not right as he and the other pandavs are the main cause for Mahabharata. He also talks about the cross-cousin marriage in Mahabharta.
The feminist notion exists in most of the chapters of this book. Khattar Kaka talks against dowry system, polygamy, biasness with women in different rituals and their role in the mythical stories. He finds Ram god because Sita is his wife. He criticises the behaviour of Dushyant towards munikanya, pandavs toward draupadi's disrobement etc. He also criticises vedas and upnishads for indecent depiction of women.
He cogently attacks the prevalent notion of cultural superiority of ancient culture, superstition and dogmatic beliefs in the Mithila region. He finds the history as the history of Raja and Brahman and describes them “bhogi raja and krodhi brahman” and both were greedy. People go for satyadev's puja, Durgapuja, yagna etc to get purusharth but he finds most of the text used in these pujas as the story of biased gods and says that mere repeating this will not help. If one has to achieve some material benefits then he will have to do some work in that direction. He draws parallel in western culture and says that if these notions of lagna, nakshatra and jyotish are true then how western countries have developed so much without knowing all these things. The development in western world is the result of rationalisation of thoughts and working in the direction of better scientific development. He critics the hypocrisy and arrogance rampant in cultural texts.
Further, he says that various school of Indian philosophies are not logical to accept. Vedantic philosophy says that every thing is false but brahman. So one should be disattatched to materialistic things in the world. Materialistic things provide temporary happiness and temporary happiness should be renunciated. Khattar kaka asks what is absolute in this world? Everything we eat, we collect transforms into some other thing. So we should give up food, medicines etc. Sankhya philosophy says that every thing exists prior to its essence. So it means that every women has child before getting pregnant. These philosophies are nothing but the representation of kamshastra in darshanshastra. Like kamashastra there are 84 aasans in yoga.
However, he says that modern mental outlook of western society is rational and provides way for emancipation of humanity from the conservatism but he is also skeptical about the entry of modernity in some cultural spheres of society which is destroying the inherent good practices of society like community feeling, care for elderly etc. The knowledge that modernity produces is useful for development in public and private sphere but one should filter it according to his or her society. He is polemical against the present day government and their policies. He cautions us that accepting aid from western world have capability to destroy our uniqueness. He also criticizes the socialistic pattern of governance and says that communal farming or land redistribution will have free rider problem. Today, he is cultivating something because he knows that he will receive the benefit of handwork. If the benefit will go to everyone then he might not work. The scientific development in agriculture, medicine, transportation system etc can be imported but when we start importing political system like democracy and economic system like socialism then the problem starts. The atomistic society and individualism is the cause for the all contemporary problems like inflation, corruption etc. Democracy gives every one equal right to choose their leader but this also creates a situation where 99 wise will have less value than the value of 100 unwise. The coming of Freudian analysis in modern thought is similar to portions of Vedas, Upanishads, Ayurveda and other poetic creations where sexual verses hegemonises the other rational verses. In our society there should be meeting of occidental and oriental but the proportion should be devised by us.
***
Harimohan Jha in this book tries to find out the logic behind the cultural, moral and social reality in Mithila region and formalises a system where knowledge should be first judged and then accepted in one's daily life. He proposes a form of epistemology in addition to logic which is based on laukik perception(ordinary perception through sense organs), moving from nirvikalp perception to savikalp perception(indeterminae to determinate perception), laukik sabda (which can be questioned and overruled by some other trustworthy knowledge, when it becomes available). One of the main idea in his work is “Ideal language analysis” so that picture of the world can be construed by means of expressing atomic facts in the form of atomic propositions, and linking them using logical operators.
If someone is giving water to a plant then he also sees the result so it's laukik perception, which can create knowledge based on evidence but if someone is doing yagna for rain then there is no pramana. Therfore, this knowledge is not true and it should not be followed. If we see clouds in the sky then we can not say that there is going to be rain i.e. nirvikalp perception but if certain kind of cloud always gives rain then it's savikalp perception. So, to acquire knowledge one should move from nirvikalp perception to savikalp perception. One should understand that winter in the region is caused due to southward movement of sun.
He is not opposed to Dharma when it stands for pure Righteousness. However, he has problem with the idea of Dharma as defined by Brahmanism. What Brahmanism loyalist call Dharma is nothing but Adharma, pure and simple. The hallmarks of Brahmanism are Varna Dharma and Jati Dharma. How can a Dharma consider some people as inherently inferior to others and condemn them to a life of servitude? The doctrine of the Gunas of Prakriti and Law of Karma, the very foundation of Brahmanism and Varna Dharma, were evil inventions of Brahmins to maintain their class superiority over everyone else, and to rule them for personal profit and security. By brainwashing people about these dogmas (BG: 3:5, 27, 33; 18: 40-45; 59-60), they practically enslaved them psychologically.
He believes that each object in nature has its own inherent quality. For example, fire is hot; water flows; air blows, etc. This is distinct from Brahmanism’s theory of the Gunas. Now, where is the proof that three Gunas of Prakriti exist in reality? This is nothing but a figment of imagination. There is no proof to the fact that certain groups of people share a specific Guna. If the doctrine of the Gunas were true, how come so many “lower class people” allegedly of Tamasic Guna are more “Sattvic” than many “high class” Brahmins of Sattvic Guna? If the Gunas determine the quality of all actions, how come so many “lower class” people perform such great and honorable deeds?
Old Brahmanism claimed that one is born again in another body after one dies. They called this cycle of birth, death and rebirth Samsara. They claimed that one’s enjoyment or suffering in this life was determined by their deeds in their previous lives. Where is the proof for all this nonsense? We believe that the body is made up of four base elements: earth, fire, water and air, and consciousness arises from these elements no different than alcohol arising from a mixture of grain, hops and yeast. When we die consciousness also dies with it, and these elements go back to their original forms.
To profit from this concept of Samsara, Brahmins conceived a place out there in the sky, which they called heaven. They brainwashed people into believing that if they followed Brahmanic dictates faithfully and performed expensive and elaborate sacrifices to please gods, they would go to heaven after death. If they did not follow Brahmanic dictates, they would suffer dishonor here on earth and go to hell hereafter. This was a classic reward-punishment tactic to control people and profit from it. So the hoax of Law of Karma not only served the purpose of keeping the other people subjugated, but also was a source of income to Brahmins. Brahmanism primarily operated from inside this Samsara box.
The reformist zeal is prevalent in most of the writings of Harimohan Jha like kanyadan, duragman etc. In this book also he does philosophical enquiry to social conditions of Mithila. He finds that due to complicity of modern knowledge and modern regimes of power we became the consumer of “universal modernity” and so institutions of the modern knowledges located in a space somewhat set apart from the field of universal discourse, a space where discourse would be modern yet 'national'.
No comments:
Post a Comment