Skip to main content

My Christmas




The Buddha, Jesus and Mahatma Gandhi are three persons whom I found myself admiring as I grew older though not proportionately wiser.  I don’t share their great qualities, feeble as I am.  In fact, I may find myself towards the middle of the spectrum if we construct such a continuum of human qualities and personality traits as the one envisaged by philosopher Spinoza.  Is what another philosopher, Nietzsche, said of himself true for me too: “What I am not, that for me is God and virtue” [in Thus Spoke Zarathustra]?

If I apply Spinoza’s classification, these three luminaries whom I have grown to admire belong to the category of people who regarded love as the primary virtue, considered all people to be equally precious, and resisted evil by returning good.  Spinoza argued that people like Jesus and Buddha constructed an ethical system that stressed feminine virtues.  At the other end of that spectrum are people like Machiavelli and Nietzsche [and most administrators I’ve been fated to live with] who stressed masculine virtues, acknowledged the essential inequalities of human beings, relished the risks of conquest and rule, and identified virtue with power.  Towards the middle of that spectrum lie people like Socrates, Plato and Aristotle [oh, so antique!] who identified virtue with intelligence.  An informed and rational mind can make better decisions than one guided by love or power, says Spinoza – and I agree.
 
As the world gets ready to celebrate the birth anniversary of Jesus (Christmas), I found myself overcome by an urge to explore why I admire Jesus in spite of his emphasis on love and compassion, virtues that I can’t claim to possess.   I know well that I don’t deify what I am not, a la Nietzsche.
 
The first thing I like about Jesus is that he questioned the very fundamentals of his religion, Judaism.  Jesus was crucified by the Jewish priests.  The priests did not like Jesus’ questioning of their religion and the way it was being practised.  He drove out the commercial entrepreneurs out of the synagogue [John 2:15].  He accused the religious teachers of being hypocrites [Mathew 23: 1-15].
 
Jesus argued that merely following religious rituals or laws would not guarantee anyone salvation.  “Not every one who says to me ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven,” said Jesus [Mathew 7:21].  Jesus wanted people to live a life based on certain fundamental values and principles, especially love, and not merely follow rules and observe rituals.

The Sabbath was not as holy for Jesus as for his religious leaders.  It is better to do good to other people on Sabbath than merely observe it as a ritualistic holiday, said Jesus [Mathew 12:12, Mark: 3:4].

What Jesus wanted people to do was to have purity of heart, rather than follow rituals.  Good actions will ensue automatically.  It is the inner goodness and the good deeds which follow automatically that really mattered to Jesus.  He did not value the man who claimed to be “not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers...” but claimed to “fast twice a week, give tithes of all that I get.” Jesus argued that the man who admitted his weaknesses in all humility and sought to keep his heart pure was the real religious person [Luke 18: 11-14].

Women who committed adultery were to be stoned to death, according to the Jewish law.  When such a woman was brought to Jesus, he said, “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her” [John 8: 7].  Jesus accepted the fallibility of human beings.  What he asked people was to rise after each fall, learning the lesson from it, and to become a better human being.

The prodigal son’s homecoming is a far greater occasion for celebration than the dutiful son’s regular goodness [Luke 15: 11-32].  Bringing the lost sheep back to the fold was more important than tending the regular flock [Mathew 18: 12-14, Luke 15: 3-7]. 

Restoring goodness to each individual – that was what Jesus wanted.

Religion was not his concern.  Rituals were not at all his concern.  Mere recitation of prayers meant little to him. 

In fact, he did not even found a religion.  The Catholic theologian, Hans Kung, says, “he (Jesus) did not seek to found a separate community distinct from Israel with its own creed and cult, or to call to life an organization with its own constitution and offices, let alone a great religious edifice.  No, according to all the evidence, Jesus did not found a church in his lifetime.” [The Catholic Church, Phoenix Press, 2002, page 11]

I admire Jesus, the man, the visionary, the philosopher.  His message is still relevant, as far as I am concerned.  His churches, however, don’t remind me of his message.  So I shall celebrate Christmas in my own private way.

Wish you a Meaningful Christmas.

[Note: All the Biblical quotes are taken from the Revised Standard Version.]

Comments

  1. Thanks and wish you a Merry Christmas.

    ReplyDelete
  2. A very Merry (and enlightened, as obvious from the post) Christmas to you and family, dear Matheikal. :). God bless.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Aditi, I don't claim enlightenment. I'd like to follow the middle way of Spinoza, the thinking person's way.

      I'm delighted to understand that you still care to read me.

      Delete
  3. If you take an economic perspective of what you have said, you land up in Libduration Theology, as I understand you and LT!

    Merry Christmas to you, in the way it makes sense to you, away from all religions.

    RE

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You know why LT failed? The Pope and his cardinals have too much money!

      Delete
    2. Oops, that was Liberation Theology (the explanation not for you, but any visitors to your space who may search for "Libduration"!).

      And, LT was fighting for the un-monied! They had and still have no chance. Remember the Archbishop who got assassinated?

      RE

      Delete
  4. The world can be a much better place without religion.

    ReplyDelete
  5. i agree with you 100%.. his message of purity and inner goodness is what stands out about him.. i wish u a Meaningful Christmas as you call it.. :)

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ayodhya: Kingdom of Sorrows

T he Sarayu carried more tears than water. Ayodhya was a sad kingdom. Dasaratha was a good king. He upheld dharma – justice and morality – as best as he could. The citizens were apparently happy. Then, one day, it all changed. One person is enough to change the destiny of a whole kingdom. Who was that one person? Some say it was Kaikeyi, one of the three official wives of Dasaratha. Some others say it was Manthara, Kaikeyi’s chief maid. Manthara was a hunchback. She was the caretaker of Kaikeyi right from the latter’s childhood; foster mother, so to say, because Kaikeyi had no mother. The absence of maternal influence can distort a girl child’s personality. With a foster mother like Manthara, the distortion can be really bad. Manthara was cunning, selfish, and morally ambiguous. A severe physical deformity can make one worse than all that. Manthara was as devious and manipulative as a woman could be in a men’s world. Add to that all the jealousy and ambition that insecure peo...

Abdullah’s Religion

O Abdulla Renowned Malayalam movie actor Mohanlal recently offered special prayers for Mammootty, another equally renowned actor of Kerala. The ritual was performed at Sabarimala temple, one of the supreme Hindu pilgrimage centres in Kerala. No one in Kerala found anything wrong in Mohanlal, a Hindu, praying for Mammootty, a Muslim, to a Hindu deity. Malayalis were concerned about Mammootty’s wellbeing and were relieved to know that the actor wasn’t suffering from anything as serious as it appeared. Except O Abdulla. Who is this Abdulla? I had never heard of him until he created an unsavoury controversy about a Hindu praying for a Muslim. This man’s Facebook profile describes him as: “Former Professor Islahiaya, Media Critic, Ex-Interpreter of Indian Ambassador, Founder Member MADHYAMAM.” He has 108K followers on FB. As I was reading Malayalam weekly this morning, I came to know that this Abdulla is a former member of Jamaat-e-Islami Hind Kerala , a fundamentalist organisation. ...

Lucifer and some reflections

Let me start with a disclaimer: this is not a review of the Malayalam movie, Lucifer . These are some thoughts that came to my mind as I watched the movie today. However, just to give an idea about the movie: it’s a good entertainer with an engaging plot, Bollywood style settings, superman type violence in which the hero decimates the villains with pomp and show, and a spicy dance that is neatly tucked into the terribly orgasmic climax of the plot. The theme is highly relevant and that is what engaged me more. The role of certain mafia gangs in political governance is a theme that deserves to be examined in a good movie. In the movie, the mafia-politician nexus is busted and, like in our great myths, virtue triumphs over vice. Such a triumph is an artistic requirement. Real life, however, follows the principle of entropy: chaos flourishes with vengeance. Lucifer is the real winner in real life. The title of the movie as well as a final dialogue from the eponymous hero sugg...

Empuraan and Ramayana

Maggie and I will be watching the Malayalam movie Empuraan tomorrow. The tickets are booked. The movie has created a lot of controversy in Kerala and the director has decided to impose no less than 17 censors on it himself. I want to watch it before the jingoistic scissors find its way to the movie. It is surprising that the people of Kerala took such exception to this movie when the same people had no problem with the utterly malicious and mendacious movie The Kerala Story (2023). [My post on that movie, which I didn’t watch, is here .] Empuraan is based partly on the Gujarat riots of 2002. The riots were real and the BJP’s role in it (Mr Modi’s, in fact) is well-known. So, Empuraan isn’t giving the audience any falsehood as The Kerala Story did. Moreover, The Kerala Story maligned the people of Kerala while Empuraan is about something that happened in the faraway Gujarat quite long ago. Why are the people of Kerala then upset with Empuraan ? Because it tells the truth, M...

Empuraan – Review

Revenge is an ancient theme in human narratives. Give a moral rationale for the revenge and make the antagonist look monstrously evil, then you have the material for a good work of art. Add to that some spices from contemporary politics and the recipe is quite right for a hit movie. This is what you get in the Malayalam movie, Empuraan , which is running full houses now despite the trenchant opposition to it from the emergent Hindutva forces in the state. First of all, I fail to understand why so much brouhaha was hollered by the Hindutvans [let me coin that word for sheer convenience] who managed to get some 3 minutes censored from the 3-hour movie. The movie doesn’t make any explicit mention of any of the existing Hindutva political parties or other organisations. On the other hand, Allahu Akbar is shouted menacingly by Islamic terrorists, albeit towards the end. True, the movie begins with an implicit reference to what happened in Gujarat in 2002 after the Godhra train burnin...