Article : The Curious Case of Ashutosh Maharaj.
The verdict is reserved. The Punjab and Haryana High Court has listened to Hindu Saint Ashutosh Maharaj ji’s case more than three years and now any day the outcome can challenge the status quo. The appellants may be sure about the outcomes, but the faithfuls of Divya Jyoti Jagriti Sansthan (DJJS) has many reasons to believe their hard stand on Ashutosh Maharaj’s state of samadhi. Samadhi, a state of penance and deep meditation in which soul leaves the body. DJJS believes that their religious head is in deep samadhi, and he will come back any day. In Hindu religion, burial is not a common practice, but from whatever records are found in Hindu scriptures and History, it is evident that saints have commanded independent authority over directing the performance of rituals in their case. This is so because Saints, only themselves, know whether they are going into ‘Samadhi’ from which they will return into their bodies or are taking eternal ‘Nirvana’.
By Bhavya Srivastava
Published on UC Web on 16/05/2017
As per Sanatan Dharma the highest goal of a human life is to attain state of Supreme and Highest Consciousness. The Seers and Sages of India have been dedicating their entire lives to attain this State of ‘Chaitanya’. They impart the same knowledge and discipline to their followers and disciples. In the vedantic system the exalted seers leave their bodies in order to raise themselves to the supreme consciousness. This higher rising is permanent or temporary is only known by them or to those to whom they have revealed. However, decision of their cremation or performances of any other rites solely depend on their own instructions or as per the modes established by the belief systems. In the theological set up of vedic religious practices the followers exercise great devoutness and discipline in veneration of Samadhi State of religious perceptors and masters. In Kailash Samhita of Shiv Mahapuran – there is a record of Kartikay telling Vamdev that any ritual in case of ascetic must only be performed as per the instructions of Guru.
The glorification of a super-human, or a personality, whether religious or political who impacts times and lives is an old way to show reverence. Mao, Lenin or Francis Xavier are few examples. Their bodies are preserved with great regard and people see them in awe and admiration. Two years back, when a Hindu saint, Ashutosh Maharaj was declared in Samadhi and his followers preserved his body under freezing temperatures, the practice of Samadhi was critically discussed. Somehow, the case of Ashutosh Maharaj’s Samadhi has turned out to be in a tussle between faith and law. The vast majority of saints can objectively supports the idea of Samadhi and stand about this right and vouch on cultural and religious autonomy, finding there is no moral or societal violation done by the practice. But as this particular case has many dimensions involve and court is hearing this case day by day, the decision may shed some light on the faith rationality and laxman rekha of existing laws.
In few countries you can preserve a body by law. India has no such laws, but it’s an open fact that religious leaders have the privilege and autonomy according to their practices. Ramanujachrya (1017-1137 AD) is still preserved in Srirangam temple complex, with natural methods and herbs. Though the same practice was not followed for other gurus, their last rites were performed as per their wish or traditions, in many cases they are buried and shrines or tombs are erected atop. Interestingly there is no law in India on disposal of bodies and therefore in the absence of law who is to decide that whether you cremate, bury or freeze your leaders? Who is entitled to sit over a decision on the mode of disposal or whether to dispose of a body at all or not? In the case of Ashutosh Maharaj, Punjab and Haryana High Court has heard all the parties, from State, to former aide, and self-declared son. However, the alleged son seems to have no right since according to Hindu Law the biological family of a Sanyasi or an ascetic has no right over him/her and the legal heir of a Sanyaasi/Sadguru (Spiritual Guru) are his disciples.
Strikingly, in the case of Ashutosh Maharaj ji the High Court Single Bench has evoked Article 21 of the Constitution in its judgement which is now impugned on Division Bench whereas both the alleged family and Sansthan have also relied on the Article 21 which gives protection of life and personal liberty. However, as per legal interpretation Article 21 speaks only of dignity and that is where it ends. It does not say anything about mode of disposal. Moreover, in the impugned judgement of the learned Single Bench had nowhere mentioned that how did he arrive at a conclusion that preserving of Samadhic body of Ashutosh Maharaj was indignity when the world has already witnessed many political and religious legends, like Mao, St. Francis Xavier and Lenin, been preserved which is not regarded as dignity but reverence and respect. The legal adjudication of this entire case becomes all the more intriguing when on one hand the petitioners, who dragged it into the court and made it a controversy, have lost their maintainability and on the other hand the Constitution under its Article 25 gives rights to individuals and groups to practice and propagate any faith as per their conscience and under Article 26 gives rights to religious institution to manage their own affairs. Nonetheless, the premise of this case is not the Samadhi or deep freezing of a saint’s body, but the very tradition of Gurus-Shishya Paramparain Sanatan Dharma where ‘Guru Agya’ & ‘Guru Sewa’ is supreme. In Sanatan Dharma, a Guru is not a merely man or woman in particular attire or lifestyle, he represents embodiment of knowledge which makes you realize the truth, the element of God within. This knowledge and wisdom gives his/her followers the awakening. For followers the words of the Master – the preceptor are the ultimate commandment for the disciples to follow. In the case of Ashutosh Maharaj ji, his prophecies and indications on Samadhi is claimed by his followers to be their guiding light.
In today’s India when it has become very easy to mock any practice of faith of majority community, making it controversial by questioning its rationality it is very difficult to say who all will have its bearing on what the entire situation looks like. However, in the present case of Ashutosh Maharaj ji, it will be interesting to see how faith will be tested on yardstick of still developing modern science and scuttling previous faithful practices that can never be established through scientific examination or how it will be dealt by law in the absence of law of disposal and religious institutions having constitutional autonomy only subject to some riders which have so far not proved to be violated in this case.
Onus on justice lies falls more on law and order, can mostly judge the merits and demerits of the petitioners and the societal perceptions. Exceptions are always there, but to carry an example according to faith may create division in minds. Its tough to deal with blindness and one way approach. Lets hope time will decide the best and we question the irrational and transform faiths according to needs and demands
Faith has become too fragile and futile sometimes due to the allegations its faces by its own followers. The ‘blind’ followers can be seen as a selfish group. The notions have changed and the religious practices now need new laws and norms, sometimes.
