|
|
|
||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
Does the amount of attention paid to devatas give a misleading impression of the importance of these 'minor dieties'?M.N.Srinivas coined the term "sanskritic" to cover the ancient sanskrit texts and the deities and practices described therein, and distinguish them from the myriad localised gods and practices found in the villages. McKim Marriott used the terms "great traditional" and "little traditional" in a similar way [Reader 4.2]. However, these are fragmentary terms, and suggest a bipolar division between 'higher' and 'lower', or 'important' and 'unimportant'. Is this really a valid distinction? The life of a village Hindu is such that what constitutes "important" may be very different from that considered important by a western scholar. Theologians from a Judeo/Christian background might look for the closest analogy to their own god, and conclude that the most 'important' Hindu god was Brahma - the creator. Alternatively they might look at Brahman (also known as Bhagvan) - the absolute but impersonal supreme entity, and conclude that this most closely compared to God, and was thus the most important. If they examined religious texts, looking for something akin to the Bible or the Qur'an, they would gravitate towards such tomes as the Mahabharata, the Ramayana or the Bhagavad Gita. These detail many gods, but place particular emphasis on Vishnu, whose incarnations - Krishna and Rama - are the heroes of these epics. It could naturally be assumed that such vast pieces of literature (the Mahabharata "has the dubious honour of being the longest poem in the world" [Enc p222]) would be composed to honour the most important deities. If we look at the numerous images of an exotic India, we see many elaborate and colourful images of deities such as Shiva and Ganesha. We see the ornate temples, constructed according "rigid rules of mathematics and symmetry" set down in ancient sanskrit texts [SP p78], such as the Temple of Muktesvara at Bharnsnesvara [AC1]. We see extravagant festivals such as Durga Puja, in which for ten days the entirety of Calcutta is given over to celebration of the mother goddess Durga. Indeed, there is a caste of potters whose entire livelihood is dependent on creating the images that come to be used in the festival [TV15]. Such lavish splendour would leave us in no doubt as to the importance of these beings. So a scholar could reasonably conclude that these were the most important deities in Hinduism, with Brahman the most important of all. However, when we look at the lives of ordinary Hindus, in the villages in particular, this does not seem to be the case. The higher gods play little part. In particular, "practically no institutionalised religious activities are directed purely to God conceived as Bhagvan" [Reader 4.2]. Rather it is the devatas (minor gods, godlings) spirits, ghosts and demons that receive the most attention. These so-called minor deities "play a great part in the life of the peasant and the ordinary man" [Enc p229]. Does this mean that they are considered most important? A devata will frequently be unknown in all but a single village, and sometimes worshipped by but a single caste within that village [u7-10 2.19] (sometimes even a single household or person [VC; TV15]). These can be thought of as patron gods - gods whose purpose is to watch over the village. Hence to the village, they are of considerable importance, while for everyone else they are of no importance whatsoever. Consider the ghosts (bhut). They are frequently ghosts of people know by the villagers - people who met untimely deaths and who are now troubling the village. These ghosts (like western ghosts) are highly localised. Every village will have their own set of ghosts, some more troublesome than others, but all of whom require appeasement. On occasion, a bhut will take possession of a person and cause them to fall ill. Although the first recourse will be to 'conventional' medicine, if the doctor cannot help and a bhut is suspected, an ohja (witch doctor, or shaman) is consulted. They will attempt to establish the nature of the possessing entity and to exorcise them, thus curing the patient [VC]. Interestingly, many diseases have been deified (e.g. sitalamata the smallpox goddess, and hadakaimata, the hydrophobia goddess [u7-10 2.18.5]), and so a cure must involve their pacification. These beings may not be 'important' compared to such cosmic beings as Vishnu and Shiva, but if they are causing the sickness of a child, then to the parent they become of prime importance. Add into the mix the "deification of natural forces, of heroes and blackguards, of ancestral spirits" [u7-10 2.20.1], along with the worship of trees, rocks, rivers and mountains [SP pp63-67] and we have a bewildering assortment of devatas. Some are beneficial, and are worshipped in order to obtain favour, or in thanks for favours obtained. Some are malevolent, and are worshipped as appeasement. All are worshipped though, and are considered powerful enough to affect the life of the village, and so must be considered 'important' at least in some sense [Reader 4.2]. Villagers do not consider the higher gods 'unimportant' though. They will "honour the devas and acknowledge their superiority in terms of both power and importance" [u7-10 2.16.2]. They will often begin the day with an offering of water to Surya - the sun god. Villages have their own temples and festivals dedicated to them, albeit on a different scale. A small wooden box containing a six-inch icon becomes a temple, and obeys all the same laws as the grander examples [SP; also VC and AC]. "Though they may look insignificant, these ... are the nerve centres of rural religious life" [SP p80]. A meal amongst family and neighbours, with a brahman priest reciting sanskrit texts, becomes a religious festival. However, the details of the higher gods tend to be restricted to the sacred sanskrit texts, a language most villagers cannot even speak let alone read, whereas the devatas are part of an oral tradition. This raises the higher gods out of the reach of the ordinary villager [Reader 4.2]. In fact, the higher deities could be considered too important. They are "thought to be busied with important affairs" [Enc p229] and too busy "doing the work of Bhagvan at a universal level" [u7-10 2.16.2] to be troubled by the day-to-day affairs of village life. For simple people leading simple lives, it is the day-to-day problems that are of most immediate importance. So it is the local devatas, the day-to-day gods, that they turn to. These beings "are always available to help the villager in his trouble" [Enc 229]. One does not write to the Queen to fix a street light. So the worship of devatas is very much pragmatic in approach. Puja is done to cure an ailment, to ensure a good harvest, and generally to maintain the welfare of the worshipper and their village. Recall the three complexes introduced in units 7-10 to model Hindu worship. Worship and appeasement of the devatas corresponds closely with the "pragmatic" complex, while puja directed towards the higher gods is more focussed on the "dharmic" and "transcendental" complexes. "The [devas] are ... worshipped chiefly for the purpose of acquiring spiritual merit" [Reader 4.2]. The higher gods tend also to be considered more in the province of the higher castes, the brahman in particular. Lower castes tend to worship them as part of a sanskritic ritual or festival, conducted or overseen by a brahman priest. However, rituals to lower gods can be conducted by a non-brahman, or alone "at the initiative of the individual" [Reader 4.2]. "The deities thus form a kind of hierarchy according to the status of their devotees" [Reader 4.2; also u7-10 2.19.8]. In fact, it has been observed that there is a hierarchy of deities structured similarly to the caste hierarchy, particularly in terms of the eating of meat. "These lesser deities themselves form hierarchical relationships in a manner similar to that found in the caste system [u7-10 2.19.8; also Reader 4.2]. E.B.Harper noticed a three-tier hierarchy. The highest were the vegetarian "devaru", below them the meat eating "devate", and lowest the bloodthirsty and demonic "devva" [Reader 4.2]. It is worth noting that the ohja, whose role it is to deal with minor deities, are usually of the lower castes. In fact, if someone were being troubled by the bhut of a lower caste person, a brahman ohja would be tainted by it [VC]. This association of higher gods with higher castes is sometimes utilised deliberately by lower castes trying to raise their status. "In so far as Sanskritic forms ... bear prestige, they may be copied by castes who wish to improve their status in the local cast hierarchy" [Reader 4.2]. For example, Reader 4.2 illustrates the Coorgs adopting the annual shraddha ritual under the direction of a brahman priest to honour their ancestors, rather than making offering via a low-caste oracle. Notice how this association between higher gods and higher castes may contribute to western misunderstandings. If they perceive the brahman to be more important than, for example, the chamar (the leather workers caste) they might conclude that, by extension, Vishnu is more important than Siddh Charino (a dangerous chamar devata). However, Hindus do not view matters so simplistically. 'Importance' is relative. The brahman may be more pure than the chamar, but they are dependent on them. Without the services of the lower castes, the brahman could not survive without sacrificing their purity. They may be pure, but only relative to the less pure. In a similar way, the higher gods rely on the lower gods, which are considered subservient but complementary and necessary, just as the lower castes are. "The pure deities are above the impure deities but are dependant on them" [Reader 4.2]. This can be seen in temples, where Shiva or Vishnu might take pride of place, but a number of lower gods act as guards and gatekeepers. Compare Hinduism to a huge international corporation, which has diversified into many sectors and departments. An average employee will be far more concerned with his particular job, and appeasing his departmental manager. He will have little if anything to do with the Board of Governors, and may not even know their names. However, there would be no question of his department manager being more important. However, in the final analysis, all these myriad spirits, devatas, godlings and gods, are all considered aspects of a single universal divinity. They are all "servants and manifestations of the High God, by whatever name he is known" [Enc p230]. As such, to the Hindu there is no question of 'importance'. They are all divine, and they all deserve their reverence. Bibliography
|
|
Except where stated, this site and its contents are copyright ©2009 Alec Harkness and licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.5 License.