A personal review of Dr. Arun Shourie’s ‘Does He know a Mother’s heart?’, published by Harper Collins India in 2011

In a searing Tamil film titled, ‘Naan Kadavul’ (I am God), in the penultimate scene of the movie, a young blind beggar-woman would have been about to be sold to an extremely ugly looking and bad person by the villain who runs a begging syndicate. Earlier, he would have contracted to send his ‘beggar employees’ to a Malayali begging syndicate owner who would have come looking for beggars to line the streets, for the Festival season there. The movie was stark and in your face. It is worth watching for it disturbs our cosy world of drawing room conversations on souls, reincarnation, karma, etc. More on that in a while. Back to this young beggar-woman.

She would urge the Agori to end her life for she would say that the lot of the people like her was suffering and that death would be a relief. I am unable to recall the other powerful lines she would say. Those lines in essence would question the notion of a merciful God.

Of course, the movie does have a slightly feel-good ending in the sense that the Agori would go after the villain running the beggar-syndicate and kill him.

That said, it is a movie that leaves you with questions – big questions – on the karma of the poor, handicapped, old, young and child beggars captured and ill- treated by the villain. It is very hard for people like us to reconcile their suffering through recourse to the nation of karma, reincarnation.

The legendary Tamil lyricist and atheist-turned-theist Kannadasan once wrote that in all suffering and joys what remained were questions (in the song ‘Ezhu Swarangalukkul’ in ‘Apoorva Ragangal’).

Those are the questions that Dr. Arun Shourie raises in his latest book, ‘Does he know a mother’s heart?’. A good friend was kind enough to bring that book to me from India and I finished reading it although it was not an easy read.

Dr. Shourie is candid and humble enough to admit, in the end, that he might not have learnt all the lessons fully that are to be learnt and, what more, not even a fraction of them. He also acknowledges that whatever works for the person concerned, each of the methods that they adopt is a valid method.

In the light of the above acknowledgement, it is futile and even pointless to pick issues with his observations on God, on karma, on the role of time and chance in creating suffering and his askance at the purpose of suffering, etc.

Indeed, there is another reason not to question his conclusions, besides his declaration that they are personal. We simply cannot put ourselves in his shoes, 1

no matter we try. It is not possible even with those living with us. A wife cannot Page

Dr. V. Anantha Nageswaran. Email: [email protected] A personal review of Dr. Arun Shourie’s ‘Does He know a Mother’s heart?’, published by Harper Collins India in 2011

understand the husband’s insomnia and the thoughts he might be going through. In the dead of night, staring into the ceiling, with the mind running amok, he might be feeling mighty jealous of the wife snoring away soundly (pun intended) and might want to wake her up with a bucketful of water. I doubt if the wife would be able to empathise with that.

We cannot understand the mental turmoil, the wrestling with myriad of emotions, the struggle to make sense of the suffering and the struggle to accept it that Dr. Shourie must have gone through throughout his life, to be able to say that his inferences are flawed. I doubt if we would be in a position to analyse, in an intellectual framework, the suffering as he has managed to do. Most of us might be bitter or overly cynical or both.

We should also not forget that he was a wonderful Minister for Telecom and Privatisation and did his job with remarkable zeal and competence even as he was facing all these battles – a son with cerebral palsy and a wife with severe Parkinson’s – during that time too. These personal struggles did not come in the way of his performing his public duties much more competently and without blemish than any before him and after him have done.

All that being said, he had chosen to put his thoughts down in a book for sale to interested readers. It is inescapable that readers would form an opinion – whether correct or not, whether justified or not, whether they are as well read or not, whether they are ignorant or not. Pl. remember these caveats as you read my observations on the book below.

Notwithstanding the intellectual framework that Dr. Shourie tries to build for the arguments he makes in his book, it is apparent that this is a personal tale. It is perhaps a cathartic exercise or experience for him to write the book. However, it is hard to separate the arguments from the personal suffering that he has gone through. Put differently, it is impossible to know whether he would have reached the conclusions that he reaches about the notion of God, karma, reincarnation, rituals, etc., but for his own personal experience with pain and suffering. This is not so much a criticism as an observation.

The following short poem is also attributed to Kannadasan, cited earlier. I shall first reproduce it verbatim in ‘Tamil’ and then try to capture the spirit of it in an English translation:

Kadavulidam Manithan Keattanam...! 2

Page

Dr. V. Anantha Nageswaran. Email: [email protected] A personal review of Dr. Arun Shourie’s ‘Does He know a Mother’s heart?’, published by Harper Collins India in 2011

Pirappu enbathu Yathena Keatten..! Piranthu paar..! - Ena Iraivan Sonnar..!

Vaazkai enbathu Yathena Keatten..! Vaazndhu Paar..!- ena Iraivan sonnar..!

Irappu Enbathu Yathena Keatten..! Iranthu Paar ..! - Ena Iraivan Sonnar..!.

Anubavathil Anaithum Kidaithal Iraiva - Nee Eatharkku..!

Antha Anubavame Naan than Endraan Iraivan...!

Translation:

I asked God what is birth? He told me to be born to experience it. I asked him what life is. He told me to live and experience life. I asked him what death is. He asked me to experience death. Then, I asked him why was he needed if I had to experience everything myself. God said that that he was that experience.

All experiences are God or god-given. Some people readily accept that notion and accept everything life throws at them. For them, there is no contradiction between belief in God and suffering.

In fact, Dr. Shourie talks of how mankind attributed divinity or declared as God things they were fearful of or were intimidated by. He then goes on to add that the number of things that they declare as God shrunk as their understanding grew. Perhaps. If it is thus clear that God was man’s creation, then what is the point in blaming HIM for our suffering. There is no HIM or HER. It is our creation. If there is no external GOD, then how would HE know a mother’s heart or anyone’s heart for that matter?

3 Page

Dr. V. Anantha Nageswaran. Email: [email protected] A personal review of Dr. Arun Shourie’s ‘Does He know a Mother’s heart?’, published by Harper Collins India in 2011

Time and chance are the only explanations, according to Dr. Shourie. Fair enough. For us too, many things are difficult to digest, as it is for him. Gang rape of women, rape and murder of children, child-trafficking, child pornography, deaths and sufferings of millions in natural disasters – these are difficult to explain by recourse to karma spread over many births.

That does not mean that the theory of karma or the theory of accumulated Vasanas through multiple births is wrong. It is neither provable nor disproven. Of course, psychiatrists such as Bryan Wyss have now said, based on their therapy sessions for some clients, that the number of births that a human being goes through is a lot more than we can imagine.

That said, it is difficult to know why the ‘suffering’ has to happen at a particular point in time in our life. In other words, why it has to strike us randomly or unexpectedly? Isn’t it logical to expect that we pay off our debts first – in other words, should not all the retributions for our sins and karmas take place from the time we are born and until we reach a particular age and then human beings are left to enjoy the fruits of their positive deeds? Why do people good lives but suffer deeply in their old age? What is the rationale for the sequencing and the appearance of suffering at particular points in time? At least, this novice reviewer does not know the answers yet. Dr. Shourie’s frustrations in trying to make sense of suffering are understandable and felt by many.

But, let us turn around the focus from suffering to happiness and good living. Sometimes, it is equally difficult to explain the good lives that many of us are blessed with or lead, without recourse to their past good deeds. In other words, it is hard to find a justification in our present lives for the good life that we enjoy. There has to be some explanation based on past lives. That seems the most plausible one until something better comes up.

Further, it is hard to accept is his interpretation that the recourse to karma and past lives is an attempt to blame the victim. The only example he cites for this attitude comes from the life and utterances of ‘Mahatma’ Gandhi.

He finds it hard to accept some of Mahatma’s comments on the suffering of jews in the hands of Hitler and in many other similar instances and that is correct. But, I find it harder to accept that, in India, karma and past lives are used to blame the victim. Most of the time, sufferers themselves in the process of coming to terms with their suffering offer these explanations.

4 Page

Dr. V. Anantha Nageswaran. Email: [email protected] A personal review of Dr. Arun Shourie’s ‘Does He know a Mother’s heart?’, published by Harper Collins India in 2011

I very much doubt that a woman gang-raped is left uncared for because it is felt that she would have been a rapist in her previous birth and that she is merely reaping the whirlwind now.

There is no contradiction between helping the suffering and, at the same time, wondering if it could be due to some past karma. That argument appears unpersuasive.

Dr. Shourie disagrees that Karma should be and is the sole determinant of what happens in our lives. He says that chance is a major determinant. Second, he rejects the notion of reincarnation, which, according to him, is invoked when our condition is not manifestly attributable to our deeds here and now.

Later, however, he proceeds to make some qualifications to his above remarks on the role of Karma and past births in determining our sufferings in the present life (p. 294). Those qualifications are in the nature of reconciling the notion of karma with the notion of degree of self-control and influence over our lives and the outcomes. That the Hindu religious texts incorporate this flexibility should, in itself, be a strong indication of the lack of conflict between the notion of God and that we create our own present and future.

I am not sure if Dr. Shourie had gone through this ‘conversation’ between a disciple and the Sankaracharya of Sringeri Mutt. I put CONVERSATION under inverted commas since the authenticity of the dialogue is unverifiable now. It is worth going through. Here is the link: http://www.advaita-vedanta.org/articles/The_Riddle_of_Fate_and_Free.htm

With warts and all, I am prepared to live with karma and past lives being part of the factors both in our suffering and in the good times we enjoy than the ‘time and chance’ that Dr. Shourie is now comfortable with. The former leaves me with the hope that I can change them with my actions today whereas the notion of ‘time and chance’ being the important or the overriding factors leaves me with hopelessness and helplessness.

Recently I received an email from a friend with quotes from many Western intellectuals – from different walks of life – on reincarnation. Some of them were particularly thoughtful:

"Were an Asiatic to ask me for a definition of Europe, I should be forced to

answer him: It is that part of the world which is haunted by the incredible delusion 5 Page

Dr. V. Anantha Nageswaran. Email: [email protected] A personal review of Dr. Arun Shourie’s ‘Does He know a Mother’s heart?’, published by Harper Collins India in 2011

that man was created out of nothing, and that his present birth is his first entrance into life."

- Arthur Schopenhauer, 19th century German philosopher

"The doctrine of transmigration… was a means of constructing a plausible vindication of the ways of the cosmos to man; … none but very hasty thinkers will reject it on the grounds of inherent absurdity."

- Thomas Huxley

In other parts of the book, Dr. Shourie exhaustively criticizes recourse to God men, to astrology, the belief in miracles performed by God men, their own greed for power, wealth and money, etc. Indeed, many believers of God would be perfectly happy to go along with these criticisms and exhort the readers to internalise these criticisms.

In fact, more than non-believers, believers in God should be particularly aware of the inconsistency between the belief in an all-powerful, all-knowing God and at the same time, taking recourse to propitiating planets, seeking cures from God men, etc. Indeed, if we are prepared to accept all experiences as God or god- given, we will be at eternal piece with ourselves and with life as it unfolds.

In his ‘Search in Secret India’ Paul Brunton recalls his conversation with a very famous astrologer in Varanasi. This is what the astrologer has to say:

Paul Brunton (PB): And Yet you depend on astrology for guidance, I retort quickly, instead of your own soul

Sudhei Babu (the astrologer) SB: You are not right. I never look at my own horoscope now - in fact, I tore it up many years ago.

PB: I express astonishment at this statement. He replies:

SB: I have found the light and do not need astrology to guide me, but those who still walk in darkness find it helpful. I have placed my life entirely in the Lord's hands. I carry the act to its proper conclusion by giving up all the care about the future or past.

Whatever the Lord sends, that I accept as His will. I have given my whole self - body, mind, actions and feelings - to the will of the Almighty. 6

Page

Dr. V. Anantha Nageswaran. Email: [email protected] A personal review of Dr. Arun Shourie’s ‘Does He know a Mother’s heart?’, published by Harper Collins India in 2011

PB: Suppose you are threatened with death by a murderous ruffian, would you do nothing and accept that as God's will?

SB: When any danger arises I know that I have only to pray and instantly to receive His protection. Prayer is necessary but fear is not. I pray frequently and the Lord has marvellously protected me.

Yet, I have been through great troubles. Through all of them I was conscious of His help and I trust Him fully under every event. One day you, too, will disregard the future and become indifferent to it.

Source: p. 216, 'A Search in Secret India' by Paul Brunton

To this astrologer, total belief in God gave him the ability to disregard the future and live in the present. That goes to show that belief in God is no hindrance to being pragmatic, practical or scientific.

Two well-known strong believers in God in Tamil Nadu – deceased writer and computer scientist ‘Sujatha’ (Rangarajan) and political commentator Cho. Ramaswamy – did not believe in astrology and horoscopes one bit.

There is nothing inherently unscientific about believing in God and yet finding the ability to go through life with grace. Indeed, some attribute their ability to do so to their beliefs.

It is interesting that Dr. Shourie recalls a conversation with Mr. Pande, the Cabinet Secretary in V. P. Singh’s government and his astrological prediction about the longevity of the V. P. Singh government that was completely wrong. This happened in the late eighties. I am curious to know if Dr. Shourie had referred to this any time before in his writings.

Dr. Shourie has evolved in his understanding and acceptance of astrology. Previously, he might have been a believer or not. We do not know. Yet, he is now convinced that it is flawed and dangerous to rely on it. That is his evolution.

Similarly, many things that he says that science can explain may turn out to be authentic explanations or falsified by further scientific developments. Not believing in something that is not scientifically proven sounds very rational but it not necessarily so. Science is constantly evolving.

If we are unable to explain something with scientific knowledge that is available 7

today, then should it necessarily be discarded? Page

Dr. V. Anantha Nageswaran. Email: [email protected] A personal review of Dr. Arun Shourie’s ‘Does He know a Mother’s heart?’, published by Harper Collins India in 2011

In a lovely article on the 15th January 2011 in The Guardian, featured by www.dailygood.org, a scientist is quoted as follows:

Carlo Rovelli, a physicist at the University of Aix-Marseille, emphasised the uselessness of certainty. He said that the idea of something being "scientifically proven" was practically an oxymoron and that the very foundation of science is to keep the door open to doubt.

"A good scientist is never 'certain'. Lack of certainty is precisely what makes conclusions more reliable than the conclusions of those who are certain: because the good scientist will be ready to shift to a different point of view if better elements of evidence, or novel arguments emerge. Therefore certainty is not only something of no use, but is in fact damaging, if we value reliability."

Source: http://www.dailygood.org/more.php?n=4608

Dr. Shourie cites extensively from the work of scientists/doctors studying the function of the brain to argue that most of the experiences that mystics claim to experience at higher levels of consciousness can be and are replicated in laboratories. That does not necessarily falsify those experiences nor do they become fake, consequently.

In this article in Guardian again published in 2005, scientists stress that they have only set out to explore religion but not to disprove it. Radiologist Andrew Newberg of the University of Pennsylvania says that the idea of designing drugs to boost spirituality would actually be underpinning a practice that has existed for hundreds of years, with scientific understanding

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2005/feb/24/1

Dr. Shourie’s prescriptions for handling suffering and to help those suffering are, beyond doubt, laudable. Shedding negativity, observing and eliminating thoughts, serving without pity, serving without expectations, living in the here and now are all things that many pious men and women would agree with too.

He asks us to examine whether our preferred practices – rituals and pilgrimages - to deal with sorrow and suffering make us more dependent or self-reliant. He says that they are crutches. For him, the notion of God is a crutch. Indeed, it is so.

He had written earlier that we called Gods those phenomena that we could not

understand or feared. Suffering on a massive scale should make us set aside the 8 Page

Dr. V. Anantha Nageswaran. Email: [email protected] A personal review of Dr. Arun Shourie’s ‘Does He know a Mother’s heart?’, published by Harper Collins India in 2011

notion of God, says Dr. Shourie while acknowledging that that is what must have given rise to the notion of God in the first place.

What is wrong in relying on a crutch when there is a need? When we have two strong legs, we rely on them. When one is fractured and is healing, we rely on a crutch. If we accept everything - good and bad, sufferings, sorrows, joys and good times as God’s ‘Prasadam’ (offering or gift) – then we do not need any crutch. Notice however that this absence of the need for a crutch can actually stem from the total, unquestioned and absolute belief (complete surrender) in the notion of the existence of a God.

Indeed, in page 302, Dr. Shourie himself acknowledges the role that rituals, pilgrimages, visiting temples, worshipping idols and similar practices play in our lives:

“To the extent that these practices help, they do so not by pleasing God but by reconditioning our minds, and thereby equipping us to better deal with the situation. In this sense, the practices are valuable: they contain potions derived from eons of experimentation by seers.”

In the end, it boils down to this: Dr. Shourie acknowledges that Bhagwan Shri. Ramana Maharishi and Ramakrishna Paramahamsa were great saints. They refused to divert their minds to heal their bodies. The equanimity with which the painful and fatal illnesses were borne by these two were an example and a lesson to us. Dr. Shourie writes that “their own averments notwithstanding, I just cannot bring myself to believe that they were afflicted with such searing pain just so that they may leave us an example of how even extreme pain and tribulation ought to be borne’.

This is a personal question that has not been answered and that is no basis for us to question his personal conclusions. This much has been acknowledged right in the beginning of this review.

Yet, I find it appropriate to end this review by reproducing a few paragraphs from the speech of Mr. Shashi Tharoor at the pan-IIT meet in the year 2006:

I grew up in a Hindu household. Our home always had a prayer-room, where paintings and portraits of assorted divinities jostled for shelf- and wall-space with fading photographs of departed ancestors, all stained by ash scattered from the incense burned daily by my devout parents. Every morning, after his bath, my father would stand in front of the prayer-room wrapped in his towel, his wet hair 9

still uncombed, and chant his Sanskrit mantras. But he never obliged me to join Page

Dr. V. Anantha Nageswaran. Email: [email protected] A personal review of Dr. Arun Shourie’s ‘Does He know a Mother’s heart?’, published by Harper Collins India in 2011

him; he exemplified the Hindu idea that religion is an intensely personal matter, that prayer is between you and whatever image of your maker you choose to worship. In the Hindu way, I was to find my own truth.

I think I have. I am a believer, despite a brief period of schoolboy atheism (of the kind that comes with the discovery of rationality and goes with an acknowledgement of its limitations). And I am happy to describe myself as a believing Hindu: not just because it is the faith into which I was born, but for a string of other reasons, though faith requires no reason. One is cultural: as a Hindu I belong to a faith that expresses the ancient genius of my own people. Another is, for lack of a better phrase, its intellectual "fit": I am more comfortable with the belief structures of Hinduism than I would be with those of the other faiths of which I know. As a Hindu I claim adherence to a religion without an established church or priestly papacy, a religion whose rituals and customs I am free to reject, a religion that does not oblige me to demonstrate my faith by any visible sign, by subsuming my identity in any collectivity, not even by a specific day or time or frequency of worship. As a Hindu I subscribe to a creed that is free of the restrictive dogmas of holy writ, that refuses to be shackled to the limitations of a single holy book.

Above all, as a Hindu I belong to the only major religion in the world that does not claim to be the only true religion. I find it immensely congenial to be able to face my fellow human beings of other faiths without being burdened by the conviction that I am embarked upon a "true path" that they have missed. Hinduism asserts that all ways of belief are equally valid, and Hindus readily venerate the saints, and the sacred objects, of other faiths. Hinduism is a civilization, not a dogma. There is no such thing as a Hindu heresy.

Dr. Shourie’s beliefs are as valid as mine are.

10 Page

Dr. V. Anantha Nageswaran. Email: [email protected]