Present Dialogue with the
Traditional Orthodoxy
Mahima Dharma is an example of the
fact that revival and reform within Hinduism can also come at the present
time from within so to say, out of the tradition itself. The question
only remains how the dialogue between Mahima Dharma and representatives
of the orthodox tradition takes shape today, practically and theoretically.
Theoretical dialogue between Mahima Dharma and representatives of the
orthodox tradition has lost nothing in sharpness. It takes place mainly
in religious debates on the occasion of Purnima celebration which always
find a large audience because of its preference for rhetoric, especially
prevalent in Orissa. On this occasion the Samnyasis attack especially
the Brahmins and portray them as cheats and exploiters who pay homage
to false gods, with whom one had as well nothing to do at all and from
whose repressions one should ultimately liberate oneself. To this the
orthodox side hits back mostly with a slander of Mahima Dharmins, “dirty
fellow” who do not know Sruti and Smruti at all, do not even know
Sanskrit correctly etc. This form of “dialogue” takes place
on a higher level, too. For instance, two lectures delivered on the auspices
of the congress on Mahima Dharma held in the spring of 1971,actually contained
mere speeches of this type.
Practical dialogue between the sect,
which breaks through the caste order with the institution of common meal
and the traditional social order of the world around needs another complementary
sociological study. So far as I could ascertain up to now it can find
the following different solutions:
(a) A complete economic and social boycott by the traditional system.
This rakes place primarily in the village where the Mahima Dharma followers
represent a small minority. I have come across one example only: in sahapada
(Boudh) six families of Kaibarta (fisherman) caste gave up their membership
of the sect, because they could not bear isolation within their own caste.
The journal Adibasi also reports of a similar case of conflict in which
the residents of the village prohibited their children from taking part
in Balyalila that was organised by an initiated Brahmin.25
(b) The breaking of caste barriers has a limited significance only, since
the local community consists of the members of one and the same caste
and within this some it forms a new caste. Thus the community in Kaorduala
(Sambalpur) to give an example, consists of Harijans exclusively. The
shrine containing the Balkala of a locally important Baba stand in the
Harijan sector, but another shrine outside this sector directly at the
entrance of the village is planned, of which a large tower is standing
already- a short of symbol of this entire village. The community is remarkably
large here and forms its own group and with in the Harijans who perform
the rites of individual life, even marriage in particular cases, according
to the directions of the sect. The theoretical possibility of inter-communion
with other castes, effectively put into practice on the occasion of pilgrimages
to Joranda elevates this group out of its surroundings at least in its
own eyes.
(c) The caste barriers are broken through ritually, but are not abolished
on principle. This was noticed by me most frequently. In Dadapali (Rairakhol)
for instance, where members of different caste, e.g. Chasa (farm labourer)
Ghoura, Khonda, Tangola (tribals) and Dhoba (washerman) belong to the
Mahima Dharma community, a common satsanga Gosthi is celebrated once a
year. Apart from this, these people accept no food from each other and
marry only with in their own caste. Therewith the institution of Satsanga
Gosthi has again the function of a ritual only. An exceptional position,
like the one occupied by the meal taken together in the Jagannatha temple.
(d) The members of Mahima Dharma form a new caste, the members of which
come from various castes and which remains “open”. This seems
to have been the case sometimes in the nineteenth century: However, it
takes place today, so far as I can judge it up to now, only very seldom,
and rudimentarily so to say, e.g. in Baunsudi where a marriage ceremony
was carried out several times.
Besides the first case of boycott
the followers of the sect are again assimilated in spite of their initial
separation from the traditional system of Hinduism manifest outwardly
too in their clothes. Either they continue to remain the members of their
caste too. Or are placed again in the entire system that they do not abolish,
but loosed it indeed and question it with their presence. Here the dynamism
of Hindu tradition which rejects heterodox movements as well as absorbs
them in a far stronger measure, is evident. Mahima Dharma pursues the
function of heterodox movements in Hinduism. The task of this function
appears to be to protect the tradition from torpidity, to act as a corrective
to the tradition by adding to it new elements as well. In the case of
Mahima Dharma, to give an example the development of a personal, social,
ethics and old elements which were forgotten, e.g. Vaisnava doctrine of
equal relationship of all human beings with god.
25
Adibasi, op. Cit. p.59
|
