1. The P***ionate Soul-Fusion with Icons - Tiruvasagam

2. Criteria for Truth Content in Science

3. Who Gave Us the Vedas?

4. Theology as Science

5. Manikavasagar's Hymn 'Oli Valar Vilakke'

6. Science as Theology

7. One God, Many Stages of Manifestations

8. Deep Silence and Becoming Free of All Illusions - Tayumanavar

9. Theories in Religion

10. Cognitive Dissonance and Experiential Bisonance

11. Why in Science and Why in Religion

12. On the Machine world Model

13. The Dance of Destruction and Transcendence - Tiruvasagam

14. Genuine Prayer

15. Ways of Being Religious

16. The Deep Silence and its Metaphysical Significance - Tayumanavar

17. On the Unpleasant Sides of Religion, and Reactions

18. Ways of Being Scientific

19. Divine Songs and Earning the Grace of BEING - Namaalvar

20. The Space of Deep Silence Where BEING Is - Vallalar

21. Call Him, "Father", He will be your Father - Tirumular

22. DevaDeva Mahadeva - Tirumular

23. We Can Understand BEING Only with His Grace - Tiruvasagam

24. Poetry and Praxis in Science and Religion

25. Adyaar The Truly Religious - Tiruvasagam

26. Lord gives Bliss and Wealth too - Tirumular

27. Value System in Science

28. Lord's threefold Union with Souls - Tirumular

29. Determinism and Indeterminism in Science

30. Seek Him and He Comes Like Rain - Tirumular

31. Blind Following Religion - Tirumular

32. God For All - Pasupathi

33. Origins of Deepavali - Skanda Puranam

34. Quarrels among Devotees of God - Tirumular

35. Learn Vedas for Liberation - Tirumular

36. The Mind in the Contemplation of BEING Always - Namaalvar

37. Numbers in Science

38. Numbers in Religions

39. Magic in Culture and Religion

The Passionate Soul-Fusion with Icons

Bakti comes with passionate involvement with iconsÊ and which creates various kinds of sectarian cults like the non-philosophical Saivism VasihNavism Saktatism and so forth. They single out a certain icon and become very passionately involved with that and which leads them to denigrate other icons despite the fact thatÊ they very well know that even such iconsÊare in fact the presentational forms of the same BEING as the source of theirÊ favorite icons.

Thus great philosophic mystics like Appar and Namazvar for e.g. despite profound understanding of BEING and that He remains ABOVE all such icons, still they have preferences that make Appar a Saivite and Namazvar a VaishNavite.

It appears that such a passionate involvement is part of Bakti for some reasons. But what can be the reasons?

Here we have to seek some help from the deep human love especially that between aÊman and woman that can be the source of rejuvenation if successfulÊand death if not. Thus such a love that is soul-fusing so that separation is quite unthinkable becomes a suitable model to understand some aspects of Bakti so well developed in Sacred Tamil and right from ancient days. We can find such a Bakti in enormouslyÊbeautiful anf metaphysically profound hymn to In-Anna of the priestess En Hudu Anna

The key concept is soul-fusion but here the human soul fusing with BEING but in a cerrain iconic form. For only when BEING is seen in some iconic formÊ that He has some resemblance to the human and hence can be that which can be loved as if a person and so forth. This is what we find n Sri AndaL seeking to marry not any ordinary human male NaraNanÊHimself and who is immensely a PERSON for AndaL, BEING lowers Himself down into an iconic form that is almost human so that He can become the one who is deeply LOVED and worshipped. With this there comes to be an intimacy because of the soul-fusion that comes to prevail

But what is the metaphysical significance of this soul-fusison?

Certainly something like Pygmallion Effect in socialÊ psychology but much more drastic thatÊ takes place during moments of intense fusion of a soul with an icon. The soul gets transmuted unto the shape of the ICON it fuses with and with that loses its human identity and becomes in fact divine and hence noble and so forth. This is how BEING brings about evolutionary development of th souls.

Mannikar articulatesÊthis aspect of Bakti by projecting himself into such a Bakta.

1-2

koLLeen purantaran maal ayan Vaazvu kudi kedinum
naLLeen ninatu adiyarodu allaal narakam pukinum
eLLeen tiru aruLaalee irukkap peRin iRaivaa!
uLLeen pita teyvam unnai allaal
eHkaL uttamanee!

Meaning:

Out Lord the Noblest One!
ÊLet it be known that I will not seek the form of existenceÊ founded by Indra VishNu and Brahma even if it means the total destructionÊ ofÊ my present existence.Ê I will not seek to beÊ with any one other than your devotees even if threatened with life in hell.Ê And I will never despise the remaining bodily existence if it happens to be founded by your Grace and nothing else. Certainly I will not meditate upon any other deitiesÊother than you!

As I noted in the last essay, the two systems - science and religion - have
quite different sets of rules when they operate in their well-defined spheres of
concerns. The seven criteria for scientific truths would be the following:

First is logical consistency. Science is a rational enterprise. That is to say,
it is based on reason, logic, proof, inner consistency, and the like. Anything
that violates these will not be admitted as a scientific truth.

However, science is not a purely logical system of thought, like pure
mathematics or metaphysics or speculative philosophy. Therefore, concordance
with observed facts is another important criterion. Science is primarily
concerned with the world of experience and of reality such as it is recognized
by the normal human doors of perception. To be of interest or validity to
science, propositions must conform to every detail of empirically derived data,
both qualitative and (when possible) quantitative.

Scientific results are not one-shot experiences. They have to be confirmed and
re-confirmed over and over again. This means that propositions claimed to have
scientific validity must be verified and repeatable. But it is important to
understand that repeatability may be actual or in principle. There are many
domains of science where results are not repeatable in actuality. This is so,
for example, in the fields of planetary formation, archaeology, and of course,
cosmogony. In these contexts, what one means by repeatability is that very
similar/parallel phenomena may in fact be repeated or reproduced experimentally.

Consistency with related phenomena is crucial. No scientific result stands by
itself. Every scientific statement about a phenomenon is or should be related in
some way or other to some other phenomena.

In order for a proposition to be taken seriously by the scientific community, it
must carry actual or potential consensus among experts. In other words, it has
to be subjected to careful and critical examination by others who have studied
the matter seriously and systematically. Without this possibility, a proposition
presented to the world of science is usually ignored or rejected.

Only when experts in a field are persuaded of the correctness of a new
proposition, not by voting but by confirming it in various ways, extending it,
elaborating upon it, and relating it to other well-established results, does a
proposition become part of the general body of scientific knowledge. And this
could take some time.

Even after this has happened, there is an implicit understanding that even the
most reliable confirmation is provisional. That is, no scientific result, law,
theory, or principle is taken as the last word. The scientific community leaves
open the possibility that further evidence that might arise in the future could
question, change, or throw out what has thus far been considered to be true.
This is an important difference in perspective between science and religion.

These criteria hold for practicing scientists and for the scientific
establishment as a whole. We may look upon science as a game that a community of
participants agree to play on the basis of well-defined rules. In a sense, this
may be said of religion also. Disagreements inevitably arise when people play
together, as when two teams play ball, one following the rules of soccer and the
other the rules of basketball.

The Svetasvatara Upanishad is in salutations of Lord Rudra, the creator of Lord Brahma.

Svetasvatara Upanishad 5.18

Seeking Liberation, I take refuge in the Lord, the revealer of Self-Knowledge, who in the beginning created Brahma and delivered the Vedas to Him.

Nowhere else in the vedas is there any other reference to authorship of the vedas.

Religion has experiential as well as intellectual dimensions. The latter is
reflected in a time-honored discipline which approaches religion in ways similar
to what obtains in the scientific enterprise. Known as theology (etymologically,
a systematic study of God), its goal is to analyze, understand, and formulate in
a reasoned framework the doctrines and worldviews of a religion.

Thus, theology is a rational enterprise: That is to say, it is based on logic
and reason, exactly like science. Pursued by keen thinkers in practically all
cl***ical religious systems, it takes into account the facts of experience
vouched by religiously inspired sources, and attempts to give cogent
interpretations to the statements and texts from these. As a discipline,
theology is quite old. The word may be traced to Aristotle who spoke of
theologike as the systematic study of the nature of the divine. There have been
theologians in the Judaic, Islamic, and Hindu traditions also, although one
seldom uses this term in Non-Christian contexts.

Until the twentieth century, following the Aristotelian cl***ification of human
inquiries into mathematics, physics, and theology (metaphysics), theologians
generally considered their discipline as separate from science, essentially
different in scope and concern, though no less systematic and analytical in its
approach. Theology is concerned with cosmogenesis, ethical behavior, goal and
ultimate salvation, and other questions of profound significance to the human
condition. During the twentieth century, as science began to investigate issues
relating to the origin of the universe, the genetic roots of human tendencies,
the neuro-physiological origins of human behavior, the psychological dimensions
of unethical desires, and the like, theologians could not remain indifferent to
advances in the sciences. Many of them became interested in physics, astronomy,
biology and psychology, and weaved the results of science into their
discussions. From these emerged the view that theology may be regarded as
another branch of science.

Among the many thinkers who have articulated this point of view in the Christian
tradition is Wolfhart Pennenberg who argued that though science and theology are
different in their concerns, they both deal with the domain of public reality.
He went on to say that science needs theology for establishing a foundation for
the Laws of Nature which it discovers. In the Hindu world, Sri Aurobindo was an
eminent scholar of stature who, with a profound understanding of Hindu visions,
formulated its essence in the context of modern scientific perspectives views
like evolution.

There are two planes in the human experience of reality: the external and the
internal. There are aspects of the world that we consider, study, speculate
upon, and explain whose impact on us as beings with feelings, emotions, and
culture is minimal. On the other hand, there are aspects whose consideration,
study, and speculation have significant impact on our feelings, emotions, and
cultural identities. The scientific enterprise deals by and large with matters
of the first kind, whereas theology is concerned with matters of the second
kind.

Thus, we may look upon theology as a sophisticated enterprise that analyzes
issues related to those aspects of human existence that touch us profoundly as
beings situated in a cultural/religious framework with a history, rooted in
traditional and spiritual sources, especially in a context where science
marginalizes the human presence as an inconsequential (in the long run)
byproduct of the laws of nature.

thirumALigaiththEvar aruLiya thiruvicaippA
thalamÊkOyil
paNÊpanycamam
9th thirumuRai

thirucciRRambalam

oLi vaLar viLakkE ulappilA onRE
ÊuNarvu cUz kaDanthathOr uNarvE
theLivaLar paLiNkin thiraL maNIk kunRE
ÊciththaththuL thiththikkum thEnE
aLivaLar uLLaththu Ananthak kaniyE
Êambalam ADaraNgAka
veLivaLar dheyvak kUththukanthAyaith
ÊthoNDanEn viLambumA viLambE

thirucciRRambalam

Meaning:
Oh the Lamp of shining glow!
The Inextinguishable One!
The Sense that is beyond the sense!
The Cluster of crystal clear marble!
The Hill of ruby!
The Honey sweetening the mind!
The Fruit of Bliss in the merciful mind!
Oh the One Who enjoys the divine dance
of cosmos with the hall (of thillai) as the stage,
tell the way in which, I, the servitor, will speak You!

Notes:
1. ulappu - end; aLi - grace.

shaivam.org

Every theology is based on some doctrines. In fact, a set of doctrines is
sometimes referred to as a theology. Doctrines are statements which one is
expected to accept and believe in, without any or sufficient proof. Often there
are advantages to accepting doctrines: In the religious context, the acceptance
of doctrines permits membership in a group, and it may lead to positive feelings
and certain types of enhanced experiences as a human being.

In the scientific world too there are some basic doctrines, though they are
seldom explicitly stated as such. For example, the statement that every feature
of the experienced world must be intelligible to the human mind, i.e. can be
adequately explained by the exercise of reason through scientific methodology,
is a doctrine to which the scientific community subscribes. The statement that
every occurrence has a cause is another doctrine in science. Or again, of a set
of possible explanations for a phenomenon, the simplest is the correct one is
also a universally accepted and implicit scientific doctrine.

Another important doctrine of science is that the laws of nature operate
everywhere in space, and have not changed since the genesis of the universe.
[These have been shown to be related to the conservation of linear momentum and
of energy.] It could, in principle, be that different laws operate in different
remote galaxies. But such an ***umption would make it impossible for science to
consider cosmology. Science is an intellectual enterprise, which means that it
needs a well-defined framework to operate.

The most compelling argument for accepting some the doctrines of science is that
on their basis, science has been able to obtain an impressive range of
significant and consistent results pertaining to perceived reality.

Up until the first decade of the twentieth century, physicists were largely
concerned with the explanation of observed phenomena. Indeed, this was the
avowed goal of science. However, in the twentieth century, Albert Einstein
initiated a search which was quite different from this cl***ical goal: He tried
to develop a (mathematical) theory which would unify electromagnetic and
gravitational fields. This was probably the first time that physics strived to
develop a theory, whose purpose was not to explain any observed phenomenon, but
to formulate mathematically elegant laws. Einstein's efforts in this regard had
nothing to do with data or experiments, but was inspired by the conviction that
harmony and simplicity reign in the universe. It was left to experimentalists to
discover, if possible, phenomena in which the two fields would actually be
shown to be interconnected (unified). The only inspiration for Einstein's
efforts was that in the previous century J. C. Maxwell had succeeded in unifying
the electric and the magnetic fields.

The search for unity in the absence of experimental pointers may be described as
scientific theology, in that its is based on a doctrine for which there is no
observational evidence. To say that there is a theological dimension to science
is not to belittle it, but to recognize that this enormously powerful enterprise
rests on some unproven, but immensely rewarding fundamental ***umptions.

Finally, and with a negative connotation, the dogmatic ***ertion that everything
must be ultimately reduced to science and that the only thing of relevance or
significance is science, is known as scientism. This too is a kind of theology.

The OneGod manifests differently, or at different stages is called by different names. The three verses below from the rig veda establishes that. Elsewhere it has been shown that Agni, Rudra and Soma are one and the same Being.

RV 1.164.46
indraM mitraM varuNamagnimAhuratho divyaH sa suparNo garutmAn
ekaM sad viprA bahudhA vadantyagniM yamaM mAtarishvAnamAhuH

They call him Indra, Mitra, Varuna, Agni, and he is heavenly nobly-winged Garutman.
To what is One, sages give many a title they call it Agni, Yama, Matarisvan.

RV 5.3.1
tvam agne varuNo jAyase yat tvam mitro bhavasi yat samiddhaH |
tve vishve sahasas putra devAs tvam indro dAshuSe martyAya ||

At your birth, O Agni, you are Varuna, and when you are enkindled, you are Mitra.
In you, O child of power, all of the deities are centered. You are Indra to the man who brings offering.

RV 1.89.10
aditirdyauraditirantarikSamaditirmAtA sa pitA sa putraH
vishve devA aditiH pa–ca janA aditirjAtamaditirjanitvam

"Aditi (The Primal Being) is Heaven, Aditi is the Atmosphere, Aditi is Mother (Mata), Father and the Son (putra).
Aditi is the Universal Deities, Aditi is the Five Races, Aditi is all that has been and will take birth".

Siva is also an adjective epithet or descriptive phrase for Vedic gods in General.

David Frawley writes that the King of Gods, Lord Indra is a manifestation of Lord Shiva. In the Rig veda, Indra calls Himself Shiva many times (2:20:3, 6:45:17, 8:93:3.)

Like Agni, the god, Indra is said to be a bull and Shiva of course possesses a bull (Nandi) as his vehicle. Indra is also connected with tiger skin (e.g. in RV 5:4:1:11), which is what Lord Shiva meditates sitting on.

Lord Shiva is further known as Lohita meaning 'red' and Lord Agni is too depicted red. (Agni_god_of_fire.jpg) The Agni Purana is a shaivite text. Furthermore, Lord Shiva's son Murugan is also associated with Agni and Agni's vehicle. Murugan is said to be a child of Agni. Lord Agni is said to be a bull, RV 6.48.6, and Lord Shiva possesses a bull as his vehicle, Nandi. Agni, like Lord Shiva (and Kali/Durga) is symbolized with the symbol of a torch.

Finally, shiva, the auspicious one, is an epithet of not only Rudra but of Vedic gods in general. Shiva is by no means a non-Vedic god, and Indra never really disappeared from popular Hinduism but lives on under another name. (Update on the AIT by Koenraad Elst).

Pathma

Deep Silence and Becoming Free of All Illusions

Since the days of Tirumular at least the sadhana of Deep Silence as part of Siva Yoga has been practiced by many Siddhas with many very interesting theoretical accounts of it. If the metaphysical Saivites have been strong in advocating the transcendenceÊof ALL religions and with that provide a overview if all religions where each is placed in a metaphysical space of its own, it is all because of the practice of Deep Silence as the final sadhana of the metaphysical odyssey and where at long last the soul is in total fusion with BEING enjoying the Njaanam that also confers Mukti.

Over and above the Icon of TadciNamurty where the Cin Mudra implicates this Njaanam and the Deep Silence it promotes, Tayumanavar adds a new dimension to this aspect of Divine Grace. He notes that BEING possessing the soul of a ripe person may in fact appear in human form physically closely to the person and through appropriate Upatesam, place the person into the practice of this spontaneous Deep Silence and with that enjoy personally the Njaanam that alone would dispel all illusions delusions false goals and so forth.

This may explain why many human beings end up claiming they are God incarnate hence the messiah the prophet and so forth. However the Mauna Guru is different in that he does preach , bring forth another scripture saying that it is the Word of God and so forth. Such a Guru in fact dispels all such false believes by actually leading the soul to enjoy the Njaanam through the practice of Deep Silence.

Such a posture is possible only if there is nothing there concealed from the soul and everything becomes transparent. In other words there comes to prevailÊ consciousness without any unconscious layers there.Ê Such a consciousness is the Absolutely Pure Consciousness and which when experienced makes food sleep and so forth quite irrelevant.ÊIt not only produces the supreme bliss but also all the energy necessary for the soul so that the person can continue to LIVE on withoutÊ eating food and indulging in normal sleep. Since this Pure Consciousness is the most fulfilling and closes all the motivational dynamics of the soul, it also becomes pure in terms of desires- the soul at this juncture has no motives at all.

17.

kaaNariya vallavellaan taane kadduk
ÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊkaddaaka viLaiyum athaik kaddoodeetaan
viNNil kaappu uur malao padu tiippadda
ÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊvintai enak kaaNavoru viveekaG kaadda
uuN uRakkm inpa tunbam peeriir aati
ÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊvivvidavum ennaip poola urubaG kaaddik
kaanaRavoor maaN kaaddi maanai iirkkuG
ÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊkokaiyena aruL maina kuruvaay vantu

Meaning:

The role of a theory is to explain observed phenomena. This sometimes involves
entities that are not directly perceived. From this perspective, one may say
that there are theories in the religious framework also.

Perhaps the most intriguing phenomenon in the universe is its very existence,
and that of human beings, not just as biological entities, but as feeling and
reflecting creatures that engage in love and hate, create and destroy, hope and
despair, formulate moral injunctions, and then are transformed into cold and
inert bodies bereft of the consciousness that kept them alive and kicking.

Religions attempt to explain cosmogenesis, biogenesis, and ethicogenesis. Their
answers may be looked upon as theories also. The Vedas, the Bible, and the
Koran, for example, all tell us about how Man was created. From an epistemic
perspective, these are efforts to explain the presence of the world and of
humans on the planet.

Consider the phenomenon of suffering, and its non-uniform distribution. This is
a feature of the experienced world for which traditional religions have offered
a variety of explanations. In the Hindu framework, uneven pain and pleasure is
explained in terms of actions in previous births (law of karma and
reincarnation). In the Christian tradition, one explains all suffering in terms
of the original sin of Adam, and in God's mysterious modes of operation. Islam
generally explains it all as the will of God. In the Buddhist worldview, aside
from karma, pain and suffering are the result of attachment. All these are
attempts to explain observed facts, and may therefore be regarded as theories.
Science has not yet been able to come up with adequate explanations for such
matters relating to the human condition.

Traditional religions have also offered theories about the nature of ultimate
reality. Though these are usually presented as philosophy or metaphysics, they
are also explored by theologians in many traditions. Science is concerned with
every aspect of reality such as it appears through our faculties of perception.
Philosophy and religion develop theories about the nature of reality per se,
sometimes suggesting that it is all no more than a grand illusion resulting
ignorance of spiritual truths.

In humanity's history, these theories in religion are embodied in texts that
have acquired sanctity. So they have a degree of invulnerability within
religious frameworks. Scientific and religious theories differ, not in the goal
of their proponents - which is to offer explanations, but in the attitude of
their adherents to them. It is important to recognize that their authors were
some of the keenest minds in history who sought to solve the perennial mystery
of origins in what seemed to them to be the most reasonable terms. Being
extraordinarily intelligent, it is quite possible that if the authors of those
texts were to come back, they would want to revise their theories in the light
of current knowledge and understanding.

One important difference between scientific and religious theories is this: The
success of religious theories are judged, not by their resilience in the face of
logical and empirical scrutiny, but by the reverence ***ociated with their
sources. The sanctity of the original texts result from their ***ociation with
the divine whence they have flown to humans via revelation to some individuals.
Since religious theories don't depend on verification of their logical
consequences, competing and mutually contradictory religions can flourish and
have flourished all through history.

There are many people who conduct their lives while simultaneously holding on to
what to others may seem to be incompatible worldviews. Isaac Newton, Augustin
Cauchy, Michael Faraday, and Srinivasa Ramanujan, for example, all of whom were
clear thinking and gifted individuals, had deep religious convictions which,
when brought under the microscope of logical rigor and empirical demands, might
not stand firm. It is not that these people couldn't reason. Indeed, to this day
there are many good thinkers and creative scientists who are meticulous in their
methodology when arguing, observing and theorizing, but are also committed to
some doctrinal dimensions or spiritual visions of their faith community.

In the 1950s, the psychologist Leon Festinger introduced the notion of cognitive
dissonance: a state in which people sometimes hold contradictory or
irreconcilable opinions, which could create internal tension and affect one's
behavior. Festinger noted that "there is a tendency for individuals to seek
consistency among their cognitions (i.e., beliefs, opinions). When there is an
inconsistency between attitudes or behaviors (dissonance), something must change
to eliminate the dissonance." He went on to say that "dissonance results when an
individual must choose between attitudes and behaviors that are contradictory."

It would seem that this notion of cognitive dissonance as a negative or unstable
mental state isn't not always applicable in matters relating to science and
religion. In the case of scientists and mathematicians thus described, their
views seem to them to be complementary rather than contradictory.

Perhaps what is to be recognized here is that in order to understand something,
we use our mind: thinking, reasoning, logic, etc. However, this is only one
aspect of conscious living. In many instances, we feel rather than analyze:
whether it is a beautiful sunset, the suffering of another, a piece of music, or
love for a dear one.

One result of the enormous successes of rationalistic science is that we have
come to attach far greater significance to whether one thinks rationally than to
how deeply one feels. Though interconnected, thinking and feeling often reign
separately, and even when both co-exist, one may be more dominant. Pascal was
only stating an ancient truth when he wrote: Le coeur a ses raisons que la
raison ne connaît pas: The heart has its reasons that reason does not know.

Most normal human beings oscillate between the two modes of experience: thinking
and feeling. While one is in the feeling mode, logic and analysis recede, though
they don't disappear. We are bipedal, bimanual, binaural, and binocular.
Likewise, we are also bisonant creatures: responding to the logical constraints
of the head and also to the sensitivities of the heart, if one may put it
metaphorically. [Ultimately both thoughts and feelings occur in the head.] It
has been our boon that we are feeling creatures and also, erring from time to
time in impeccable syllogism. It is our capacity to deviate from the path of
rigid reason that enables us to imagine great poetry, create great art,
empathize, and be religious also. Those who optimize their thinking and feeling
modes, who are sharply scientific and deeply religious and (in the best meanings
of the word) don't suffer from cognitive dissonance, but enjoy enlightened
bisonance. From the purely analytical perspective, this may seem strange, just
as for those constrained only by feelings, scientific understanding of the
rainbow might appear to be a heartless dissection of glorious nature.

complimentary; what is the process through which it can become
complimentary?>

Cognitive dissonance (a negative mode) occurs when one is not very clear
about what is rational thinking and what one really believes in, and when is
drawn to logical modes and the non-logical-but-meaningful modes with the
unconscious feeling or even the conscious thought that somehow the two
should not co-exist.

We become bisonant beings when we recognize the value, relevance, and
indispensability of rational thought and science, while also conceding the
limits of reasoning in many matters that go beyond merely explaining the
world. It is also important for bisonance that we experience awe, reverence,
and humility in the face of Cosmic Mystery, and place as much importance on
love and caring and comp***ion, as logical correctness.

Just as we would be half blind, partially deaf, and lame if we had only one
eye or one ear or one leg, the non-bisonant person is truly handicapped.

The question "Why does something happen?" arises in science as well as in
religion. However, the meanings attached to the question are implicitly
different in the two contexts. Suppose you are asked, "Why are you reading this
now?" Two types of answers are possible (a) "Because I always read discussions
on science and religion." (b) "Because I wish to find out what is said here."

Note that answer (a) refers to the past, to a built in system in which the event
takes place, the rules by which the phenomenon occurs, etc. Generally speaking,
science interprets why in this way when it tries to answer why-questions. The
question actually means here: What is the cause of what happened? This may be
called causative why.

The answer (b) refers to something that is yet to happen, actions directed
toward a goal, etc. This is tele (teleological) why. Generally speaking,
religion interprets why in this way when it tries to answer the question. In
most European languages (French pourquoi, Spanish porque, German Warum) the
second meaning (for what, to what purpose) is implicit. In Tamil one
distinguishes between én (causative why) and edarkaga. teleological why. This is
not as clear in the English word why.

When religion tries to answer why in the causative sense, it comes into
conflict with science. Normally, modern science does not interpret why in the
tele-sense, except when some biologists talk of entelechy. Physicists hold that
interpreting why in the tele sense, as Aristotle did, is a fruitless exercise.
So they conclude - rashly perhaps - that the question in that sense is
meaningless. Nevertheless, since the formulation of the Anthropic Principle the
tele why has crept back into cosmology.

Consider the questions: Why is the sky blue? Why does water boil when heated?
Why do planets go around the sun in elliptical orbits? Why does hydrogen emit
particular wavelengths? Why does a projectile follow a parabolic path? These and
a thousand other why's are answered routinely by science in the causative sense
of the word, and not in the tele sense. But questions like: Why did the world
emerge? Why should one be kind to others? Why is monogamy a virtue? are all
taken up by religion in the tele sense.

Recognizing that science can be successful in answering one type of question,
and relegating to others (religion, philosophy, poetry) the other kind, may be
wise. It would also be good if religion gracefully concedes to science the
responsibility of answering why in the causative sense. The following poem
throws light on this:

I once asked a scientist why the sky was so blue,

He was not sure if the answer he knew.

"I thought you knew it all," in surprise said I.

"Your why isn't clear," he gave as reply.

"If you wish to know the reason, why blue is the sky:

Blue waves are scattered, and reach the human eye.

For what purpose is it blue, and it is not green?

That I know not. You see, what I mean."

I asked a man of religion why the sky was so blue.

He said in the Scriptures there was for this a clue:

God made us and the world, this of course is true,

And to give us more joy , He made sky so blue.

The mechanistic worldview regards the world as a huge machine, operating
routinely and ceaselessly in accordance with precise and immutable laws, utterly
unaware of why it is doing what it is doing, and indifferent to whether its
functioning has any impact on anything, living or non-living. Underlying the
mechanistic view is the notion that ultimately the world can be reduced to bits
of matter, which are endowed with intrinsic properties like m***, electric
charge, and such, which bump and bounce, instigated by inter-bit forces,
rearranging themselves endlessly in countless patterns, causing all the changes
and events in the phenomenal world.

The mechanistic model for describing and manipulating the physical world is
ancient. Archimedes in old Greece and others in other traditions, who toyed with
devices and gadgets, wondered about the whole world functioning in routine
regularity, like stars and planets in the skies. During the European
Renaissance, investigators like Niccolò Tartaglia and Leonardo da Vinci gave
mechanism a boost. The dissection the human body by Andreas Vesalius, the
formulation of planetary laws by Johannes Kepler, and the quantitative analyses
of motion by Galileo Galilei, as also the Cartesian philosophical framework and
Newtonian physics: all made the machine model an appealing framework for
science. Some of the major founders and propagators of the mechanistic paradigm,
like Marin Mersenne and Robert Boyle, were also men who were deeply committed to
religion.

It was only a small step to extend this model to animals, and then to humans. If
creatures were automata for Descartes, to his compatriot La Mettrie, Man was no
different. In his book entitled L'Homme machine (1748), La Mettrie developed the
idea that human beings are nothing more than complex and intricate structures
which function in accordance with the laws of physics and chemistry. He wrote
that "soul is but an empty word of which no one has any idea," that "the soul
and the body fall asleep together," and that death was merely "the end of a
farce."

From the 17th century until the middle of the 19th, the mechanistic model
generally implied the equivalent of cogs and wheels, a clockwork of carefully
crafted material subunits working everywhere per immutable laws. However, with
the discovery of the electromagnetic field and waves through immaterial space,
it became difficult to adhere strictly to materialistic mechanism.

Two points may be noted: Every machine is designed and constructed by
intelligent beings. So, this enormously complicated and stable machine (the
Universe) could well have been designed and created by a super-intelligence.
This opens up possibilities with which those who deny things of this sort feel
uncomfortable. They would rather believe that the cosmic machine emerged by
itself. Secondly, practically every machine has a purpose. Unlike a painting or
a poem, machines are meant to do or accomplish something specific. It would
therefore seem not unreasonable to imagine that this cosmos too has some
ultimate purpose. This again has traditional religious undercurrents.

In any event, the view of the universe as a giant machine whose component parts
can be analyzed in terms of their various components and guiding principles has
been an immensely insightful framework. It has yielded more harvests than most
other models of the world. However, exploration of the microcosm calls for
subtle refinements to the mechanistic model.

Genuine Prayer

In Saiva Siddhanta and Agama literature where there are very extensive and interesting cl***ification as well as indepth analysis of rituals, they distinguish between the genuine prayers from the spurious. One of those which are spurious are the instrumental rituals and prayers where God is offered various kinds of things but only in the expectations of some boons in return. BEING is taken as a magical power who if pleased well with many offerings will in turn bless those who pleases Him thus.

Here there is another kind of spurious prayer that is mentioned and distinguished from the genuine. There are some loud and pompous prayers and perhaps also very lavish but with the hope that all blessings that may God grant will belong exclusively to the person and not to mankind in general.

Manikkar observes that if the prayers are selfish-like then BEING will not reside in their soul even as a hidden reality like a thief. He will withdraw Himself and become almost absent to such souls.

In contrast to this what Manikkar seeks or any one who loves BEING genuinely would seek is blessings of BEING so that the LOVE that holds between him and BEING holds always so that the person thus blessed will spend all his time praising the Lord not demanding at all anything.

6.
Parantu pala aay malar iddu muddaatu adiyee iRainjci
‘iranta ellaam emakkee peRalaam’ ennum anbar uLLam
karantu nilavaak kaLvanee nin tan vaar kazaRku anbu enakkum
nirantaramaana aruLaay ninnai eetta muzuvatumee

Meaning:

O my Lord! There are those who pray proffering continuously fresh blossoms requesting from You various blessings but which they also think will belong to them only. In the heart of such people You do not stand even as the hidden reality. What I seek from You is just your blessings so that my LOVE for Your Feet remains always there and I spend all my time just praising your greatness.

The Dance of Destruction and Transcendence

While the great VaishNava mystics like Namazvar despite their emotional attachment to Tirumaal or KaNNan do transcend the iconic thinking and leap into understanding BEING by noting the presence of destructive - regenerative processes every where in the cosmos, but the most popular view is the Tirumaal is the Power who conserves and Brahma is that which brings forth into presence everything . It is also noted in popular mythology that Brahma is only an aspect of Tirumnaal, a power who emerges from the navel of Tirumaal.

Now the Saivites have always understood Siva as BEING, the Power that destroys all and hence that which brings forth into presence again all. Such a power cannot have another power above it and hence this power called Siva is TaRparan, the Lord unto Himself, Siva is the only power who can self-destroy and self-regenerate and hence with nothing above Him.

It is this metaphysical understanding that is brought out in a picturesque manner by Manikkar in this verse. While BEING-as-Siva stands absolutely BEYOND the reach of Tirumaal and Brahma who emerges out of him, He nevertheless comes as the power of destruction communicated here by the metaphor of the dance with the ghosts in the cremations grounds but only to destroy the ugly forms of birth and bless the souls with more pleasant forms of birth,

Now this carries the implication that it is Siva while retaining the destructive capacities unto Himself , it is He who becomes Tirumaal and Brahma in order to bless the souls with more pleasant formd of birth.

The retention of the Power of Destruction that establishes supremacy is symbolized by the Tiger Skin that Siva wears and dances the Dance of Destruction in a frenzy something BEING loathes to do as Tirumaal and Brahma.

7.

muzuvatum kaNdavanaiup padaittaan muzi saayttu mun naaL
cezumalar koNdu eGkum teeda appaalan
ippaal empiraan
kazutodu kaaddidai naadakam aadi kati iniyaay
uzuval anbin tool udutti
unmattam meel koNdu uzitarumee

Meaning:

Tirumaal, the One who created Brahma and who is the one who created all, once recognizing the presence of a power above him sought to worship Him with fresh blossoms at hand, Despite his search BEING-as-Siva my Lord remained absolutely transcendent. However Siva appears in the cremation grounds dancing the Dance of Destruction with the ghosts so that the evil births are destroyed and more pleasant births are enjoyed by the souls. Siva moves around wearing the tiger skin to symbolize that he is the Power of Destruction and hence the Supreme.

All of us function in a framework of values and worldviews. Religions furnish us
with a grand backdrop for life, which provides meaning and purpose. From this
perspective, all of us are religious one way or another. It has been rightly
said that in a deeper sense human beings are more religious than rational.

Being religious can have positive effects on one's thoughts and actions, but not
infrequently, the opposite is also what one observes. Since the vast majority of
people in the world are affiliated to one religion or another, it is not being
religious that matters, but how one is so. Indeed, there are different ways of
being religious.

There are many ways in which being religious can be enriching, comforting, and
meaningful. Some of these include: accepting the revelations of sages and
prophets, regarding historical personages as embodiments or messengers of the
Divine, considering a body of writings as holy and beyond question, engaging in
periodic worship of the sacred symbols of a tradition, taking part in the
sacraments of time-honored rituals, participating in the celebrations of a
community, abiding by the moral injunctions of a religion as best one can,
subscribing to a doctrinal framework as to the hereafter. These are some of the
ways in which one may be religious in a denominationally determined way. Not
everyone attaches the same degree of weight to these, but millions also adhere
to them in the various religions of the human family, deriving significant
fulfillment.

There is another mode, provoked by the ugly manifestations of religions over the
ages, such as persecution, perversity, bigotry, casteism, intolerance,
inquisition, and superstitions. Here one derides all faiths, writes off God as a
product of misled minds, rejects everything whose origin is in organized
religious traditions, regards those who subscribe to a religion as deluded
souls, is suspicious of those who preach a religion, is opposed to all religious
symbols, treats religious inclinations as anti-secular, can't see even
aesthetic value in rituals, and keeps reminding the world of the danger of
religious fanatics. Though its practitioners imagine themselves to be
non-religious, this mode can become no less religious in fervor and conviction.

There is a third way: This includes recognizing the unique potential of the
human spirit and experience, affirming our finitude in the face of unimaginable
grandeur, looking upon personal achievements with humility, regarding
consciousness as unfathomable mystery, experiencing awe at the magnificent
universe, seeing something good in every tradition that has brought meaning and
solace to countless people, respecting all faiths and facial features, having
reverence for what others hold as sacred, but condemning and eschewing all
aspects of religion that harm and hurt, caring and being comp***ionate to weaker
creatures, rejoicing in the observance of happy events, considering humanity
as a single family and all life as marvelous manifestations of extraordinary
complexity, being touched by the piety of prayers and moved by the magic of
music, meditating on an Unknown Wholeness in an effort to connect with it,
conducting one's life and profession with due regard to one's responsibility
towards others and the environment, doing whatever one can to alleviate pain
and suffering, and reckoning "Thou shalt not hurt" as primary ethics.

There are also still other ways of being religious, some combining elements from
all the above. Ultimately each of us decides how to be religious in one's own
way.

The Deep Silence and its Metaphysical Significance

The practice of Deep Silence has a very long history in India and we hear that even Buddha practiced this in the context of many metaphysical questions. However it appears that it is in Saivism more than any other metaphysical traditions in India where this Deep Silence has been focused upon and its metaphysical significance brought out.

We must note here the CaGkam Tamils have analyzed SILENCE as a category of ordinary speech where it communicates a MEANING depending upon the context. There are certain things communicated by silence and one has to seek out the meaning of this linguistic silence to continue meaningful interaction (as said in Tolkaappiyam) where it is called 'munnam' that exists now as Moonam, Maunam etc.

Now this Deep Silence has MEANINGS but which are entirely different. There is an immense difference between this Deep Silence which uproots the whole of speech and the Linguistic Silence of normal speech and Tayumanavar describes as the next Secret of Sitambaram, the MEANINGS of this Deep Silence that is cultivated in Saivism more than in any other Indian darsanas and which allows to promote the transcendence of all religions.

First he notes that it is Siva who blesses the souls with Deep Silence by piling it and placing it in a certain metaphysical space where there is no temporality ecological locality and directional space and so forth. Thus the whole range of identities that are national cultural and so forth are severed by putting the soul in a transcendental space where BEING also resides.

This transcendental placing of the soul is simultaneously pulling it from the phenomenal world, the world of many bondages and hence it is also purifying and freeing the soul. This also results in the destruction of the EGO so that the soul becomes the egoless self, the Sat Self, that which is aware of only the absolutes and nothing temporal and historical

Now this destruction of Ego also results in many other features. The soul becomes non-alien to all and hence unable to impose such dichotomous relationships like 'i-Thou, He, self, other' and so forth. The Other as a category becomes a Pure Nothing, a Suunyam as noted by Meykandar.

Thus the soul one-with BEING is also one-with all and hence stands non-alien to all and lives moved by Love unto all.

Another feature is that finally freed of Malam as well as the concealing Play of BEING, the understanding becomes absolutely translucent with nothing as inside and outside and so forth.

20.
pantamaRu meynjnjaanamaana moonap
paNpenRu yaruLi antap paNpukkee taan
cintai yillai taan enum paanmai yillai
teesa millai kaalamiliai tukkumillai
taontamilai niikkamilai piRitu yilai
collu illai uravup paklaan tooRRamillai
antamillai aatiyillai naduvu millai
akamumillai puRamumillai anaittu millai

Meaning:

BEING blesses by pulling the souls towards Deep Silence that allows them to enjoy the real and authentic Njaanam that destroys all worldly ties. Once in this Deep Silence the soul transcends discriminative thinking as well as the ego-sense of self. This allows the soul to enjoy the Sat-Self - that which is absolutely beyond temporality spatiality and directionality. There are no more any worldly ties whatsoever with no thoughts as to retain some discard some and so forth. Since there is no alienation from anything the category of Other becomes a pure nothing. Language is transcended and with this the understanding becomes absolutely translucent- clear with nothing as the unconscious concealed and so forth. Since there is no temporality of time consciousness there is no more the end beginnings and intermediate positions of the world processes. The self absolutely transparent does not have inside outside - in fact lives with nothingness as its own.

Loga

In the context of attitudes to established religion, people may be cl***ified
into three broad groups: Those who are affiliated to a religion, those who are
indifferent to religions, and those who are opposed to all religions. To the
third category belong many intelligent and thoughtful people who are also
decent, comp***ionate, highly educated and enlightened. Why, one may wonder, are
such people anti-religious? The simple answer is that historical religions have
also unacceptable and unpleasant aspects.

Some doctrinal beliefs of religions blatantly contradict modern scientific
understanding. Such, for example, are the seven-day creation, the repeated
incarnations of God in only one region of the world, the handing down of the Ten
Commandments to an individual, the transmission of divine knowledge via an
angel, the creation of Man in his totality in one stroke, the centrality of
humans in the cosmos. Many have difficulty giving validity to these tenets.

***ociated with traditional religions are also many superstitions. These range
from fear of black cats and the number thirteen to choosing auspicious times of
travel on the basis of almanacs. These may be harmless, but those committed to
pure rationalism reject them.

The unpleasant aspects of religion both of the past and of the present are more
serious. In the name of God and righteousness, people have been burnt at stake
and impaled. In the name of the right religion, other sects have been persecuted
and m***acred. In the fanatical fervor of one's own religion, the symbols of
other religions have been desecrated and demolished. For maintaining religious
purity, co-religionists have been degraded and dehumanized. To safeguard the
purity of worship places, the "impure ones" entering temples have been killed.
In the zeal to fight for one's religion, terrible wars have been raged.
Religious laws have permitted maiming, mutilating, stoning, and decapitating.
Because one's own religious conviction does not allow for abortion, abortion
clinics have been burned, and doctors have been shot to death. Acts of ruthless
terrorism have been (are being) committed after reciting stanzas from a holy
book. The list can go on and on.

There is a difference between atheism which is a philosophical position, and
anti-religion which is a social commentary. The atheist is content with his or
her own disbelief in God. The anti-religionist would like to see all traditional
religions eradicated from society because of the evil they have wrought, and
their potential for more.

All through history, keen minds have spoken out against religions because of
such things. In ancient India, Charvaka spoke out against religion in the
strongest terms. In Greece, Socrates was accused of atheism. In the 18th
century, Voltaire wrote against religious beliefs. In our own times, the Tamil
atheist E. V. Ramaswami Naickar declared: "He who created god was a fool, he who
spreads his name is a scoundrel, and he who worships him is a barbarian."
Richard Dawkins wrote: "It is fashionable to wax apocalyptic about the threat to
humanity posed by the AIDS virus, "mad cow" disease, and many others, but I
think a case can be made that faith is one of the world's great evils,
comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to eradicate."

As I see it, irrespective of epistemology, by and large religions have elevated
the human spirit to high levels, contributed immensely to art and music and
poetry, and restrained the instinctive urge for self-serving behavior in an
ethical framework. They have given meaning, purpose, and consolation to
millions. Like nuclear energy, pesticides, and coal burning, they have also had
catastrophic consequences. One would hope that with appropriate awakening, the
worst of religions would be weeded out and the best would be preserved.

The power and prestige of science is so great that even those who would decry
science or remind us of its limits like to claim they are scientific. But what
exactly is being scientific? Like being religious, there are different ways of
being scientific too.

To keep abreast of developments in science from news reports and popular science
articles, to have respect for science and its theories about the phenomenal
world, to reject pseudoscience which flourished in the past and has not yet died
away, to be literate in basic mathematics, to be able to read graphs and
interpret large numbers written in the form of ten to the power of something, to
differentiate facts of observation from theories that account for them, to be
able to distinguish between explanations from the scientific community and those
from stray outsiders who propagate their ideas through books rather than as
papers in respectable journals: These are among the ways of being intelligently
scientific.

Presenting weird theories in scientific jargon in deceptively technical
frameworks, with scant attention to evidentiary rigor; talking about
supernatural phenomena or the distant future, insisting that numerology and
astrology are valid sciences, and using computers to caste horoscopes; arguing
that aliens brought civilization to earth and insisting that UFOs are wreaking
havoc on us; seeing modern science couched in ancient books, and not
distinguishing insightful poetry from scientific propositions; trying to prove
the existence of God from thermodynamics and quantum mechanics: these are among
the ways of being well-meaningly scientific.

Collecting data for systematic study; measuring and calculating and analyzing;
exploring how scientific knowledge may be applied for practical purposes;
acquiring all the available knowledge pertaining to a particular field and
trying to contribute to a discipline through papers in journals and in
conferences; probing into specific aspects of natural phenomena to uncover
underlying simplicity and natural laws; communicating with fellow workers in the
field: These are ways of being professionally scientific.

When one respects reason and carefully acquired data, demands coherence and
consistency in explanations, recognizes the importance of instruments and
mathematics in science, and knows that attempts to understand the world
requires systematic study of complex interconnections; when one considers the
truth-claims of propositions from disp***ionate and critical perspectives and
realizes that the goal of science is to explain the phenomenal world in ways
that are consonant with the results of carefully conducted observations, and
concedes that it is neither the business nor within the competence of science to
prescribe or proscribe human behavior, but only to describe the world, one is
epistemologically scientific. An epistemologically scientific person is aware
that no scientific theory can claim to be the final and never-to-be-changed
explanation of any phenomenon, but is the best one available in the context of
all available information.

Claiming that there is nothing more to life than seeking scientific explanations
for everything, imagining that every aspect of the human experience can be fully
understood only when brought under the dissecting microscope of science, looking
down upon those who derive personal fulfillment and collective joy in other than
scientific modes: these are modes of being mindlessly scientific.

On is not religious by simply putting on religious garb or muttering mantras.
Likewise, some take themselves to be scientific by using technical terms and
extrapolating to speculative world pictures from meticulously derived knowledge.
That is not being scientific.

Divine Songs and Earning the Grace of BEING

One of the fundamental facts of Dravidian spiritual life is that over and above the study of metaphysical treatises, there are hundreds of metaphysical songs that come with definite musical notes and which are to be sung in the temples or privately. This tradition is very ancient and we find the beginnings in the Sumerian Temple Hymns that were also set to music. In Sulgi's Hymn B we also find very sophisticated accents of music both instrumental and vocal and we also see the beginnings of Mantrayana as such.

The whole Tevaram comes along with the PaN, the musical rhymes with which they ought to be sung. This was also the case with Tiruvaymozi of Namazvar though the original paNs are lost and the singing seems to have been ***imilated into something like Vedic chanting.

In many places Namazvar mentions that his verses ought to be SUNG by way of worshiping BEING that he loves to call KaNNapiran and so forth. But here it is simply another name for BEING, that Power above all other divine powers and which resides in the top of the head and on the Lotus of Thousand Petals and where oozes the Black Amutu, the source of all joys both physical and mental

Bit what is the way to ascend to this region and enjoy the flow of this Amutu?

Namazvar claims that among the thousand verses he has composed, these ten verses are special in that they mention BEING as in the top of the head and well above the forehead and so forth. There is mention of Tantric Psychology and the fact that BEING resides in the top of the head by way of blessing the souls with Amutu.

So Namazvar says that if one sings these verses and request BEING for such a blessing every day then BEING will grant it by purifying the soul and make it ascend the various cakras and finally reach the Great Lotus.

11.

ucciyuLee niRkum teeva teevaRkuk kaNNapitaanukku
iccaiyuL cella uNartti vaN kurukuur Sadagopan
ic conna aayirattuLee isaiyum oor pattu empiraarkku
niccalum viNNapm ceyya niL kazal cenni porumee

Meaning:

BEING, KaNNapiraan stays at the peak of the head, (the region of the Lotus of Thousand Petals). I the Sadagopan of the fertile Kurkukuur have sung a thousand songs so that people would desire to worship BEING as KaNNapiraan. These ten verses, among thousand these ten are special for they will help people seek the divine Grace to reach the regions of the top of the head. If one sings these songs requesting BEING for His Grace, then they find the Great Divine Feet dancing in their head.

Loga

The Space of Deep Silence Where BEING Is

There has been countless number of religions some long lasting some ephemeral and all claiming that the way they propose is the only way to understand BEING. Such an egoistic attitude will surely bring about a conflict among the religionists making them not only quite cruel but esp brutal and murderous. Almost every religion has some kind of terrorism where even Hinduism is not exempted. It has the evil VarNasra Dharma that condemns to perpetual slavery millions for no other reason than they were born into the lower castes. Such a inhumanity has been going on for millenniums and all sanctioned in the name of Dharma.

Here the Tantrism of the Dravidian folks has been vehemently against all such inhumanities in the same of religions for they understand BEING as LOVE (anbee Sivam) and extol the cultivation of LOVE and COMP***ION as the most essential quality of genuine religious life.

Now another dimension of Dravidian metaphysics and which came to be emphasized since the days of Tirumular is that of Deep Silence as the ONLY Sadhana that would enable the soul to understand BEING in itself and most authentically. Since the days of Tirumular this Deep Silence has been subjected to many interesting metaphysical analysis and VaLLalaar gives such a one here in this beautiful verse.

First he notices that BEING exists in the world as the Flood of Love and Comp***ion that does not dwindle deviate and so forth. So any one who claims to be genuinely religious must show in their behavior love and comp***ion unto all.

Next he notes that BEING stands as the Supremely Brilliant Light, the Sun of the Sumerians, the Utu and so forth and who without being lighted up or stimulated shines nevertheless both as the physical Light that dispels physical darkness and the metaphysical Light that destroys the mental ignorance.

The next is that BEING is the source of JOYS as opposed to Malam and which is the source of all miseries including death. There is happiness in the world only because BEING shines deep within the souls blessing them with all kinds of joys.

But the most important observation here is that BEING stays in the metaphysical realms where only Deep Silence prevails and hence anyone who wants to understand BEING most authentically has to enter this realm and the only Sadhana is that of Deep Silence but which requires transcending all religions and scriptures.

These religions and scriptures are the ways of celestial beings, the gods and the kind of visions they provide, the words they disclose and the various rituals they promote can never help the soul to enter this Space of Deep Silence where resides BEING in His most authentic form. So the self has to abandon all religions and scriptures and practice Deep Silence to gain access into this Metaphysical Space and enjoy the Njaanam that become available only here.

This is not something that one can enjoy by way of ardent tapas and so forth but only as the BLESSING of BEING. What we can do is to prepare ourselves and show that we are fit for such a blessing.

40.
Cuziyaata arudkaruNaip perukkee enRunj
tuuNdaata maNiviLakkin cootiyee vaan
oziyaata katir parappunj cudaree anbarkadku
oovaata inparuLum onRee viNNoor
viziyaalum moziyaalum manattinaalum
vizaitaru meyt tavattaalum viLambum enta
vaziyaalum kaNdukoLarkku artaau cutta
mavunaveLi yuudiruntu vayaGkum teevee

Meaning:

O Maha Deva!

You remain the unfailing and non-deviating flood of Love that flows into the world always. You also shine spontaneously as the brilliant light that shines not only in the sky but also in the mind of all dispelling and destroying the darkness there. You also bless the devotees with joys that are endless. But despite all these you stand as the one very difficult to reach and see by the eyes language and the various tapas proposed by the celestial beings so that you are beyond the reach of religions and scriptures. You remain in the Pure Space of Deep Silence disclosing your essence only for those who reach this Space.

thirumUlar aruLiya thirumandhiram
mudhal thanthiram
civa paraththuvam
10th thirumuRai

thirucciRRambalam

munnai oppAy uLLa mUvarkku mUththavan
thannai oppAy onRum illAth thalaimakan
thannai appA enil appanumAy uLan
ponnai oppAkinRa pOthakaththAnE

thirucciRRambalam

Meaning:
One Who is elder to the three of the same category*,
The Eldest Who has nothing equivalent to Himself**,
If called, "Oh Father!", He would be the father as well,
One of youthful form shining like the gold!

Notes:
1. pOthakam - youthful

shaivam.org

thirumUlar aruLiya thirumandhiram
mudhal thanthiram
civa paraththuvam
10th thirumuRai

thirucciRRambalam

avanai oziya amararum illai
avananRic ceyyum arun^thavam illai
avananRi mUvarAl Avathu onRillai
avananRi Ur pukumARu aRiyEnE

thirucciRRambalam

Meaning:
Without Him divines can't be there.
Without Him, no great austerity can be performed.
Without Him the trinity can do nothing.
Without Him, I do not know the route to the Destination

Notes:
1. Divines like air, water, fire, sun are the essential
nature without whom we cannot survive. Lord shiva
is the essential for these essential divines to survive.
That is the reason our Lord is called devadeva.
sAmavEda hails the Lord, "Whichever Divine of the
divines is in the sky, air, earth, space, directions and
universe, to that devadeva, salutations!"

2. If the Supreme God is not worshipped then
that cannot be any great austerity/worship.
The spate of the rite done by daksha could be
thought about here.

3. God created this world for the souls to
reach the realm of Bliss. Without the guidance
of that Lord shiva, no one can get to that Bliss.

shaivam.org

We Can UnderstandÊBEING Only with His Grace

There are many valiant metaphysical souls who tried greatly to explore on their own different ways to understand BEING and settle down with the satisfaction that at long last they know BEING.ÊSuch individuals set up religions cults schools of metaphysical thoughts, very practical methods like Yoga and so forth only to learn that there is NO CERTAINTY in all these ways. BEING always remains supremely ELUSIVE towards all human attemptsÊto fathom the MYSTERY that surrounds BEING.

The point is all such efforts are egoisticÊand indulging in such efforts is in fact strengthening the Ego and which will always cast a screen across BEING so that He can never be understood and the soul shine forth in the GloryÊ of His presence.

But Manikkar has achieved this and asks rhetorically who can explain this remarkable metaphysical feat.

But of course he already indicates the reasons for his success.

He has allowed himself to be possessed by BEING and in that possession he willingly became his devoted servant, the one at His feet and which is a metaphor for servitude. This really means that Manikkar slowly learned to KILL his ego without which becoming the servant of BEING is impossible. With this inner resistance dissolved BEING overpowers the soul disclosing Himself in various ways so that a genuine understanding is enjoyed by the soul. The kind of understanding of BEING is that over and above that He standsÊas the cosmicÊreality he also standsÊas the Civan, the metaphysically illuminating Supreme Radiance that dispels the Malam from the soul so that it becomes translucent clear and pure.

9.

Bavan empiraan pani maa matik kaNNi viNNoor perumaan
Civan empiraan enai aaNdu koNdaan
En ciRumai kaNdum
Avan empiraan enna naan adiyeen enna ipparicee
Puvan empiraan teriyum paricu aavatu iyambukavee

Meaning:

BEING my lord is the Cosmic Reality and the Great LordÊ of all theÊcelestial beings and who enjoys wearing the cool Crescent MoonÊ as His head garland.Ê My Lord of Civan, the resplendent Power who overpowered me despite the fact that I am dirty with Malam infecting me. He is my Lord and I am His servant always serving Him. It is only because of this I understand this BEING as the whole of the cosmos. Now can any one tell me how my servitude also has enabled me to understand BEING thus?

Loga

Belief-systems, whether scientific or religious, have two dimensions,
and both play important roles in our lives.

First is the poetic dimension which touches the heart and elevates
the spirit. It adds to our aesthetic experience. Those who resonate
with science are excited by a unified field theory, by the complex
pathways through which life forms have emerged, by the marvel of
matter's structure, by the variety of manifestations of energy, by
the harmony of physical laws and by a hundred other unseen roots of
perceived reality which science has unveiled. Likewise, it is a
moving experience to sing psalms, chant shlokas, contemplate the
Cross and the comp***ion of the Buddha, loudly proclaim the greatness
of Allah, ritualistically light the menorah, and meditate on the
ineffable Mystery. Both science and religion can offer us such
aesthetic enrichments.

The praxis component of science is seen in the dedication of working
scientists in laboratories and research centers. We also see it in
the many ways in which scientific knowledge and understanding have
served humanity. Scientists work for the cure of diseases, for
clarifying the nature of phenomena and for dispelling superstition.
But the power of scientific knowledge has also been misused for
horrendous weapons which have maimed and killed countless lives. In
this context, it must be recalled that long before the rise of modern
science, millions died in invasions and wars through bows, arrows,
swords and maces in ruthless rampage.

The praxis of religion is reflected in the joyous celebration of
festivals, as also in self-immolation in the name of God. Yet,
perhaps, the zealous missionary who builds schools and hospitals
deserves more respect than the rationalist who proves that the gospel
is but pseudo-history. Religiously committed social workers who
serve the marginalized of a society reflect what is best in the human
potential even if journalists reveal that in some instances monies
for charities come from dictators and corrupt businessmen. The
religion-inspired altruist who feeds the poor serves humanity better
than the biologist who uncovers a selfish gene behind altruistic
acts. But then, religious preachers also terrify their flock with
threats of hell-fire, goad their followers to kill infidels, and
insist on caste purity and superiority. In this context, we may
recall that even without the zeal of religion, atheistic dictators
have done no less harm and hurt..

Beliefs and explanatory systems are important, each in its own
context: Deep conviction about God and heaven can be soothing, prayer
and meditation can be fulfilling, and cogent explanations satisfying,
but we need to know which is relevant when and where. Scientific
knowledge is productive and useful, but may be wasteful and
injurious. Religious fervor can be fulfilling, but also degenerate
into bigotry.

Doing secluded science with no concern for the possible outcomes of
new knowledge can be dangerous, though not sterile. Religious
practice that is confined to lauding the Lord can become meaningless,
though not mere noise. The best of religion can teach us to live in
community and society, for we have responsibilities towards one
another, and it can remind us that we must not be content with the
poetry of science and of religion. We must direct them for the
benefit of others. Ultimately, what matters is not what we think, but
how we feel and act.

Poetry is for ourselves, praxis for others. To me, recognizing this
is being spiritual.

Adyaar The Truly Religious

In the long history of religion in the world, several motions of the ideal religious person have been thrown up. In the Semitic faiths and certainly as inputs of the Sumerian we have such notions as the Prophets ( Su, nabi) Messiahs and so forth. In the Indic and strangely enough through the same Sumerian inputs we have Rishis Brahmins Bodhisatvas Tirtangkaras and so forth. But at about the time of the Bakti revolt against the excesses of these ancient traditions and which tended to make mental slaves of others we have the birth of the concept of Adyaar as the ideal religious persons where such a person does not seek to make slaves of others.

As Tirumular has explained this concept, an Adyaar is one who beholds the Dancing Feet (ady: feet ) of BEING and hence SEES the whole of life as a series of dramas where BEING plays various kinds of games so that the creatures are gradually purified and made to seek out Moksa.

This is what has happened to Manikkar as mentioned here BEING has played many games in his life and where many individuals he came across were such adyaars who enjoyed seeing life as Games of Siva where Siva is seen as Dancing the Dance of Bliss with Sakti, a metaphysical understanding as ancient as the Sumerian Paradise Hymn.

Thus BEING the absolutely clear and pure, plays many games in the life of all so that they also become Pure and Clean and which will make them seek our Moksa as such souls would have become tired of ordinary earthly life. The ordinary existence is needed only as long as there is DIRT in the soul and once that is removed, then earthly life is made quite irrelevant.

Now at this point comes the essential meaning of Adyaar. Such an Adyaar is one who shows LOVE unto BEING always and because of which he also shows LOVE unto all. Thus such a person, the truly religious not only will not condone the VarNaas that are so inconsistent with LOVE unto all, but will wage wars against this inhumanity. Almost all the Nayanmars and Azwars, some even Brahmins and Kings renounced all such identities and called themselves simply as Adyaar and devoted their entire life for social service. They were the people who decalred MakkaL toNdee makesan ToNdu: Service to people is in fact service unto God.

1.

naadakattaal en adiyaar poola nadittu naan waduvee
viidu akattee pukuntiduvaan mikap peritum vizaikinReen
aadakac ciir maNik kunRee! Idai aRaa anbu unakk en
uudu akattee ninRu urukat tantaruL em udaiyaanee!

Meaning:

O my Lord! You play games as dramas in life in which you appear as a devotee to Siva and I caught in the midst of it all become feverishly desirous of entering the house of Moksa O Lord who is a Mountain of Pure and Faultless Crystal! I go not have anything except unfailing LOVE into You and I pray that because of this You will implode into the deep recesses of my soul and make me melt with the love and kindness unto to all!