Ganesa, "remains celibate so as not to compete erotically with his father, a notorious womanizer, either incestuously for his mother or for any other woman for that matter."
"Although there seem to be no myths or folktales in which Ganesa explicitly performs oral sex, his insatiable appetite for sweets may be interpreted as an effort to satisfy a hunger that seems inappropriate in an otherwise ascetic disposition, a hunger having clear erotic overtones. Ganesa’s broken tusk, his guardian staff, and displaced head can be interpreted as symbols of castration…This combination of child-ascetic-eunuch in the symbolism of Ganesa – each an explicit denial of adult male sexuality – appears to embody a primal Indian male longing: to remain close to the mother and to do so in a way that will both protect her and yet be acceptable to the father. This means that the son must retain access to the mother but not attempt to possess her sexually."
"An important element in the symbolism of the elephant head is displacement or, better disguise. The myth wants to make it appear that the elephant head was not a deliberate choice but merely the
nearest available head in an auspicious direction or the head of one of Siva’s opponents to whom he had already granted salvation. From a psychoanalytic perspective, there is meaning in the selection of the elephant head. Its trunk is the displaced phallus, a caricature of Siva’s linga. It poses no threat because it is too large, flaccid, and in the wrong place to be useful for sexual purposes…So Ganesa takes on the attributes of his father but in an inverted form, with an exaggerated limp phallus – ascetic and benign – whereas Siva is hard, erotic, and destructive."
"Ganesa, then, is an attempt of the Indian psyche to transform the incestuous hunger that a son feels for his mother . "
These Freudian outlook does not stop here it continues in another American Indologist , Jeffrey Kripal an Indologist prof. in the university of Chicago. This guy does an psycho-analysis of Ramakrishna Pramahamsar. According to this guy Ramakrishna was a Peodeophile and in order to hide his ulterior motives he faked those famous trances.
These are really blasphemus for Hindus especially the one on Ganesha. This created a big furore amognst the NRI Hindus in america. The publishers recalled the books from the stores. But many western authors do these type of pyscho analysis on christian religion too. I have read articles by some christian historian that Judas and Jesus had a homo sexual relationship and judas was annoyed by jesus when jesus started to ignore him. On being outraged by this cold shouldering judas lets jesus to the romans. Also, the whole DaVinci code and lots of books of that genere (both before and after that book) questioned the legacy of christ and portrayed christ in more humanic terms.
I did not get agitated but little irritated by this view on ganesha. Constantly being barraged by periyar's much more uncouth comments on Hindu gods this psycho analysis on ganesha seemed more benign to me. But many hindus who are not exposed to periyar's barrage may not be as immune as me. Also as far as Ramakrishna parahamsar is concerned eventhough i dont know about his pedophile intentions, from my childhood i carried the conviction that something is really wrong with him. I held the view that he is a nut gone loose case. How else could we reason his wintnessing of gods who dismiss each other's existence? The philosophy of whole christian religion lies on the basis that there is no other god other than christ. Paramahamsar said he has witnessed Jesus and also Ram and also Allah. He has even banged his head against some stone pillars when he could not witness them.
I have to slightly digress now from the main topic. Recently (I think jan of this year) there was a conference in NewDelhi called “Rethinking Religion in India". I just happened to see some recorded videos of the conference on You tube. The conference head was one Dr. Balagangadhar. The talkers in the conference were some professors in socialogy from some Ivy league colleges of USA.
My curiosity increased on this man Dr.Balagangadhar. He just did not have a beard he had a mane!! I just started looking more about him in the net. He was a director of comparitive religious school in some university called Ghent in Belgium. I started googling him and i hit upon his web site. I started going through it and got to read his take on those professors paul courtright and etal.
His article began so methodically setting up a strong base. I got really impressed with the begining . I thought oh, i think i could find the missing great philosophical interludes for all the puranic stories from this counter article and also from all his books and now i can really counter some of periyars blabbering. I just felt elated and also felt really bad on myself for to have dismissed all of the puranaic stories in Hindu religion as utter nonsense with no really philosophical interludes to the main advaitic or dwaitic philosophy of hinduism.
But my joy was shortlived when i finished reading reading the article. It was as hollow as Ram goplan's (the Hindu munani leader) utterances. Dr. bala's image just imploded in me.This happens quite a few times for all of us. We would just thnk great about some one but on the basis of something but when we get to journey a little more on them their image just peters out. I thought My mother or even me could give a better counter to paul courtright's book.
The crux of Dr. Balagangadhar counter, filtering out all his meaderings in the pretext of setting up a strong base to his reasoing, is that paul courtright or for that matter any western author do not have right to comment Indian symbols, abstractedness ,philosophy and religion without taking into account the Hindu expereinces which an Hindu goes through on these symbols like says a linga.
His argument is that these distortive outlooks which even many Indians have imbibed are due to the western way of looking at things that are incomprehensible to them with out taking into consideration the unique Hindu experience.
As i said before My mother and even "gnanabhoomi" magazine could provide decent and convincing counter arguments to these baubles.
With the limited readings i have done on him, it appears that he needs to delve deep into Indian religious texts to put forth convincing arguments or just leave it bare and not defend purananic representation of Hindu philosophy (just because it hurts him as he has gone old now) rather than questioning every western author's writings with just a single argument of those authors interpretation lacking genuine Hindu expereince.
My strongest conviction is puranas are not the crux of hinduism. The upanishads, which are the real commenataries or bashiams to vedas form the crux of hinduism.
The Freudian thought of ganesha by paul courtright is also not without basis. In TN, you would find pillayar in the banks of every river in every town the river passes and there is a common folklore at least in TN that pillayar is in the banks of the rivers to find a woman ,who is as beautiful as his mother, as the river banks are the main passing by areas of women.
I feel Dr. Balu is just struck by a chord of an old man's nostalgic return to his roots and getting helpless at the inability to counter with convincing arguments.
My argument is just because it hurts the sentiments of Hindu believers people cannot stop questioning puranas. Can we say at the same breadth that just because questioning sati does not take into consideration the unique expereince the proponents of sati undergo we should limit ourself and not bring forth any reform on to that territory?
I would tell Dr.balu to propogate the "Advaitic" Consiousness in Hindu philosophy rather than meander in the defense of puranic manifestations.
More information on him and his research team can be found in
http://www.cultuurwetenschap.be/index.php?page=RESEARCH%20STAFF
The Youtube recording of the conference which Dr.Balu headed in delhi can be viewed at http://youtube.com/cultuurwetenschap.
No comments:
Post a Comment