Basrur Subba Rao, a former IAS officer, began to study the philosophers of Karnataka after his retirement. His fascinating book, Lingayat Philosophy, will be released on Saturday

Ask Basrur Subba Rao about his career before he began the study of the mystics post-retirement, he dismisses it in one stroke as “hale kathe” (old story)! An IAS officer formally, Subba Rao worked as Deputy Secretary to the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Resources. He began to study and translate the philosophers of Karnataka, and published his books ‘Kanaka Dasa’ in 2001, and ‘Allama Prabhu’ in 2007. His research paper titled ‘Role of Buddhism and Kashmira Shaivism in Lingayata Philosophy of Karnataka’ was accepted for presentation at the Indian Philosophical Congress, 90th Session, held in Bodh-Gaya in February 2016.

He is all set to release his third book, ‘Lingayata Philosophy’, an outcome of six years of research. The book, as he himself explains, elucidates the philosophy of 12th century Lingayatism embodied in 15,000 Kannada spiritual poems or vachanas. It presents translations and analyses of over 520 vachana extracts taken from the works of 60 Lingayata sharanas and sharanes. It includes historical reviews, photographs and a comparison of Lingayata and Virashaiva philosophies.

Excerpts from an interview with the author:

The title of your book in Kannada is ‘Lingayata Darshana’ while in English it is ‘Lingayata Philosophy’ which is not exactly the same. Isn’t darshana a more loaded word vis-à-vis philosophy?

You have made a sharp comment. ‘Philosophy’ refers to a body of knowledge; ‘darshana’ implies effort to acquire that knowledge. The first word is ‘passive’ the second is ‘active’, it connotes seeing, looking, observing, perceiving (see Monier Williams Dictionary, p 470). A book title permits space only for a word or two, not a sentence. So I chose ‘philosophy’. It is not wholly correct, but will do.

What led you to the study of Lingayata dharma? The profession that you pursued earlier on in your life was on a totally different trajectory.

I took up the study of Kannada mystics after retirement. The methodologies of science and philosophy do not conflict. The objective is the same: seeking the truth, but the means are different; in science, it is research and experimentation, in philosophy it is thinking and introspection. The Lingayata sharanas combined both. They were medieval scientists. For example: they knew about how the moon affects tides, and how gravity ‘pulls down the winds to earth’ (many years before Newton ‘discovered’ gravity). I have devoted a whole chapter to the ‘scientific spirit’ of the sharanas. They were fascinated as to why flood water destroys land but not itself, why a flint sparks a fire but does not catch fire, why water ‘swallows’ fire but does not get burned? What is the explanation for this ‘selectivity’ in nature? Today’s scientist knows the answers, but these questions were asked by sharanas almost a 1000 years ago. That is where the credit must go.

Your earlier book was on Allama Prabhu. He is truly one of the greatest vachanakaras and also the most abstract of them all. Can you speak about your journey with him.

Allama Prabhu opened my eyes to 12th century vachanas. But there were many sharanas who were as great as Allama but remain unknown. Molige Marayya, Arivina Maritande, Chennabasavanna, Ghattivalayya, Madara Dhulayya, Chandimarasa were philosophers of equal rank. Further, Lingamma, Mahadevi, Muktaykka, Akkamahadevi and Nilamma were sharanes who were as profound as Allama but remain unrecognised. The sky of 12th century Karnataka literature is aglow with a hundred brilliant stars.

The fact that Allama is difficult also makes him inaccessible to the Veerashaivas who would have institutionalised him as they have done to Basavanna. What do you think?

You are right. But this sort of selectivity happens. Over a hundred sharanas and sharanes of the 12th century have composed nearly 15,000 vachanas. In a basket full of diamonds which do you pick? In my book I have included extracts of some 520 vachanas in order to increase their number and show that vachana literature is not just poems of a few but a mammoth literature arguably unmatched in Indian literature.

Lingayatism is heterodox and therefore moderate. In comparison, Veerashaivism is more militant. Is this the right way to look at this?

The structure of the two Shaiva faiths is different because the sources of the philosophies are different in time. It is not fair to look at this as some sort of war between the two sects and compare the warriors! They are like brothers in the same family. Sure, there are major differences, but both were born to the same father. The Krishna Yajurveda is the common source of Sadyojata (Lingayatas), Shiva and Rudra (Virashaivas). Hopefully, a time will come when Lingyatas and Virashaivas will consider themselves as brothers, as two limbs of one great Karnataka faith.

You have dedicated an entire chapter to Memory and Computer. It is fascinating reading. This connection of science and vachanakaras seems unprecedented.

You have touched on a key point. I was astonished when I first read the vachanas and saw that they had discovered the mechanism by which the brain receives, stores and retrieves thoughts the way our computers do. I hope present-day scientists realise that 12th century Kannadigas had already thought of what they think is their stunning discovery! In fact, as I have described in my book, the role of memory was first described in the Chandogya Upanishad, thousands of years ago.

Lingayata Philosophy will be launched on April 23 at 10.30 a.m. at the Alliance Franciase de Bangalore. The book launch will be followed by a performance based on the book, ‘Like camphor on Fire’ choreographed by Kathak-dancer Madhu Nataraj.

source: http://www.thehindu.com / The Hindu / Home> Features> Friday Review / by Deepa Ganesh / Bengaluru – April 21st, 2016