The so called intellectuals call idol worship is wrong and say it is based on ignorance. Why? Because in their head they think that the man who bows to the idol is bowing to a stone - an inanimate object that can't listen and act. No doubt it is a stone, but if the academic elitist has risen above his limited thinking, he would understand it is an abstract way of connecting to the invisible divinity that is not within the ambit of human sensory perceptions.
For the ever turbulent human mind to focus on something, it has to be within the ambit of sensory perceptions. Something to see, touch and feel helps him in gathering his aliveness to the moment. When one looks at the stone or the photo, the connectivity happens to one's own inner self. The more the senses that gets involved in the act of worship, the more aware you become of the moment you are in. That's why in temples you find idols to see, bells to hear, fire to feel, fragrances to smell and offerings to eat and corridors to contemplate. Idol worship focuses on bringing you to the moment, not promising goodies later in some imagined heaven.
In what way is a sculpted stone different from a photo, a cross, a tomb, a sacred place of worship, a holy book? Are they not inanimate objects too? Why is that cherry picked as good and the rest as bad? If God is omnipresent, how can one not show reverence to everything and anything? Either the so called intellects should say there is no God and therefore nothing to worship or realize that everything is omnipresent consciousness that can be worshiped. They just want to impose their mediocre understanding of life and consciousness on the masses?
When a lover looks at the photo of his beloved, it doesn't mean he is in love with the photo but it is his way of longing for the person who is not in his presence. When a mother looks at the photos of her child, it is to recollect memories. It is human nature to be emotional and it needs an expression. Movies abuse the freedom of expression to propagate their narrow minded motives under the pretext of awakening the society. Well if that's the case, in what way could the dumb movie be better than a stone? Why do they put posters with picture of the hero in it? Or why can't they make it an audio recording of the movie? When they want to bring about maximum expression, why can't the worshiper choose his way of expressing that devotion?
To the believer the stone kindles deep emotions. To the mother photos bring back fond memories. To the academicians certificates boost their ego. To the enlightened everything is an object of great reverence.
Of course the stone, the cross or the book can't listen, talk or consume the offerings, but to the person whose intellect has truly attained clarity, he would exhibit compassion to the evolving intellects and their modes of worships. So long the masses remain a spectator without deeper understanding as to why certain things are done, the ignorant misleading elitist league would thrive.
No comments:
Post a Comment