Amos's River of Justice

Tag: Hindu Pantheon

  • American Courts are Possessed by the Spirit of Kuvera

    The debacle of Argentina’s blocked bond payment reminds me of Edward Moor’s description in his ‘The Hindu Pantheon’ of the Hindu deity, Kuvera. This deity seems to be the patron saint of Chief Justice Roberts, Judge Thomas Grieva, Elliot Management Corporation, and Aurelius Capital Management. Apparently, American courts are possessed by the spirit of Kuvera.

    American Courts arePossessed by the Spirit of Kuvera
    Kuvera

    Capitalist Manipulation

    Argentina will miss a bond payment today thanks to a U.S. court. Argentina had the funds set aside to make this payment. However, when Argentina transferred them to the bond trustee, a U.S. District Court judge, Thomas Griesa, ordered the payment sent back. He stated that his ruling will allow the parties to ‘negotiate’. What it will most certainly do is keep the scheduled payments from interfering with the vulture capitalists’ windfall—the windfall granted to hedge funds last week courtesy of our very own Chief Justice Roberts. Grieva’s ruling marks the first time in history a judge has prevented a country from paying a restructured bond holder.

    Edward Moor

    “Kuvera, the regent of wealth, for a moment demands our attention; and although few people seek the favor of this deity with greater avidity than the Hindus, yet I find but little mention of him in my mythological memoranda; nor have I any image or picture of him…On Kama, Lakshmi, or Saraswati, poets and historians dwell with complacency and delight; but the gloomy, selfish, and deformed Kuvera, claims not, nor deserves, so much of our attention….

    “His servants and companions are the Yakshas and Guhyakas, into those forms transmigrate the souls of those men who in this life are addicted to sordid and base passions, or absorbed in worldly prosperity. The term Guhyaka is derived from Guh (ordure), a word retained in several dialects: hence Guhya… We happily do not find that the regent of wealth is related in marriage or otherwise with Lakshmi, the goddess of riches, to whom a Hindu…would address himself for that boon, and not to Kuvera: he has, however, a Sacti, or consort, named Kauveri, whence I conjecture, the river of that name, in Myhsore, derives its appellation.”

    Rabinranath Tagore had similar things to say about Kuvera:

    “Those who are familiar with the Hindu Pantheon know that in our mythology there is a demi-god named Kuvera, similar in character to Mamon. He represents the multiplication of money whose motive force is greed. His figure is ugly and gross with its protuberant belly, comic in its vulgarity of self-exaggeration. His is the genius of property that knows no moral responsibility. But the goddess, Lakshmi, who is the Deity of Prosperity, is beautiful. For prosperity is for all. It dwells in that property which, though belonging to the individual, generously owns its obligation to the community. Lakshmi is seated on a lotus, the lotus which is the symbol of the Universal heart. It signifies that she presides over that wealth which means happiness for all men, which is hospitable.

    “By some ill-luck, Lakshmi has been deprived of her lotus throne in the present age, and Kuvera is worshipped in her place. Modern cities represent his protuberant stomach, and ugliness reigns unashamed. About one thing we have to be reminded, that there is no cause for rejoicing in the fact that this ugliness has an enormous power of growth and that it is prolific of its progeny. Its growth is not true progress; it is a disease which keeps the body swelling while it is being killed.” ((Tagore, Rabindranath, The English Writings of Rabindranath Tagore: A miscellany. Sahitya Akademi, 1996))

  • Cain and Abel in the Hindu Pantheon

    I should explain the reference to Cain that was in the first version of the Patriarchy article, and which I left out of this version. I wrote that in the Old Testament story Cain sinned because he forced the ground, which was how it was presented in “Mythology Among the Hebrews.” At the time I also thought it was meaningful that Cain was male. I think that approach may have created unnecessary confusion about the meaning of the myth. I suspect that the assumption that the Hebrew patriarchs are the model for modern patriarchy is incorrect, although the story of Cain and Abel wasn’t the best way to argue that point.

    In Mythology Among the Hebrews, the story had more to do with the age-old strife between nomads and city-dwellers. Cain, a solar figure was a builder of cities and an agriculturalist. Abel was a nomad. Their mutual animosity was a fact of life.

    I found another version of the story in Edward Moor’s “Hindu Pantheon.” Moor cites Mr. Wilford, who argued that the following is similar to the death of Abel.  It provides an interesting perspective on the Hebrew interpretation.

    “Iswara attempted to kill his brother Brahma, who, being immortal, was only maimed; but Iswara finding him afterwards in a mortal shape, in the character of Daksha, killed him as he was performing a sacrifice.” (Iswara is Siva or Mahadeva.)

    “There had subsisted for a long time some animosity between Brahma and Mahadeva in their mortal shapes; and the latter, on account of his bad conduct, which is fully described in the Puranas, had, it appears, given much uneasiness to Swayambhuva (Adam) and Satarupa (Eve); for he was libidinous, going about with a large club in his hand. Mahadeva was the eldest, and was indignant at seeing his claim as such disregarded in favour of Brahma, which the latter supported by such lies as provoked Mahadeva to such a point, that he cut off one of his heads in his divine form.”

    Later, Brahma, in his human shape, or Daksha, was found boasting that he ruled over mankind.

    “One day in the assembly of the gods, Daksha coming in, they all respectfully arose except Mahadeva, who kept his seat and looked gloomy, which Daksha resented; and reviled and cursed Mahadeva in his human shape, wishing he might ever remain a vagabond on the face of the earth; and ordered that he should be avoided, and deprived of his share of the sacrifices and offerings. Mahadeva, irritated, in his turn, cursed Daksha; and a dreadful conflict took place between them: the three worlds trembled, and the gods were alarmed.”

    The conflict escalated to the point that the gods separated them and effected a reconciliation. Eventually Daksha gave one of his daughters to Mahadeva in marriage. But later when this daughter, Devi, was treated disrespectfully by Daksha, she threw herself into the sacrificial fire. The battle between Daksha and Mahadeva resumed, and Mahadeva killed Daksha by cutting off his head. But before that, several of the gods were wounded in the battle, “particularly the Sun and Moon: heaven, hell, and the earth, trembled.”

    Sources:

    Moor, Edward. “The Hindu Pantheon”. T. Bensley, London. 1810.

error: Content is protected !!