Helen Crovetto is an American who describes herself as an independent scholar of religion, studying Tantric movements in India and Sweden. Her article "Ananda Marga and the Use of Force" was published in the journal Novo Religio in 2008. It gives a very curious impression. Back in the days, many scholars of New Religious Movements (NRMs) were pro-NRM. Which frankly means pro-cult apologists. Crovetto´s article can certainly be construed in this way. But perhaps her naïvety is feigned and a ruse to more easily approach Ananda Marga, the object of her studies? Not having read her other scholarly articles, I honestly don´t know. But yes, I do consider the pro-NRM/pro-cult angle "problematic", to use an annoying contemporary word!
I think it´s obvious from her article that Ananda Marga, a supposedly Shaiva Tantra NRM founded in India by Prabhat Ranjan Sarkar (Sri Sri Anandamurti) in 1955, is a very problematic organization. Corvetto writes that "maybe" a "section" of the membership engaged in violence on behalf of Sarkar during the 1970´s (when the guru was imprisoned in India), most notoriously the Hilton bombing in Sydney, but "independently" of Ananda Marga. But this is unconvincing for many reasons. Ananda Marga is clearly a fanatical cult worshipping Sarkar as God. And terrorists sometimes use fake monikers when carrying out sensitive assignments, to give their main organization plausible deniability. *Of course* herr Anandamurti was behind the violence. The author admits that the violent attacks ceased the very moment Sarkar proclaimed that he would be freed by legal means rather than force, suggesting that his supporters listened intently to his every word. So why is it so hard to believe that he had earlier given an order to *carry out* attacks? One also wonders why Ananda Marga is plagued by constant rumors of murdering ex-members. Or why some ex-members do indeed end up murdered...
Just an unfortunate co-incidence, I´m sure!
Ananda Marga turns out to have two paramilitary wings, VVS and GV, tasked with keeping order at the cult´s public meetings. Weapons training allegedly has taken place at the "European retreats" of these outfits. Well, what else could storm troopers be doing at a summer camp? Drink goat´s milk?
On 30 April 1982, residents in Calcutta carried out an attack on Ananda Marga members in broad daylight as they were crossing a local bridge. 17 Margis were killed. No arrests were ever made. Ananda Marga blamed the Communist Party of India (Marxist) for the massacre. The locals, in turn, blamed Ananda Marga for "stealing children", often interpreted as an accusation of child trafficking. Judging by Crovetto´s article, the locals may not have been entirely wrong. Ananda Marga runs homes for abandoned or underprivileged children in a number of nations, children who are often indoctrinated into the cult´s message and may even become sannyasins (ascetics, who form the hard core of the Marga membership). In Portugal, Ananda Marga actually refused to give poor children in their care back to the parents when the situation of the parents improved! The good people of Calcutta may have feared similar aggressive missionary tactics, since Ananda Marga deliberately try to increase the number of kids under their care. (This doesn´t contradict the Communist angle, since Ananda Marga and the Communist parties in India have a long-standing feud.)
It´s also obvious that Ananda Marga has a revolutionary philosophy. Indeed, Sarkar´s message sounds like a Leninist LARP around a Shaiva Tantrika core. The more "political" wing of the cult is called PROUT or PROUTist Universal, and calls for a form of socialism. (As far as I understand, PROUT is strictly speaking the name of the ideology, but it seems the organization promoting it is sometimes also referred to as PROUT.) While PROUTist Universal is technically a separate organization from Ananda Marga, it´s hardly a secret that it´s controlled by Marga sannyasins. During Sarkar´s lifetime, the sannyasins of both organizations met together under one roof, taking orders and assignaments from their great leader. Sarkar condemned capitalism, and explicitly called for revolutionary violence to bring down the system. At least on paper, he didn´t call for terrorism, but for mass struggles, and while he hoped for a peaceful transformation, revolution is never ruled out. All this is identical to the Communist position on the topic. Sarkar even believed in a kind of vanguard revolutionary organization, consisting of disaffected intellectuals! While they are apparently enlightened Shaivas in Sarkar´s version, it´s easy to see parallels with Lenin´s "What Is To Be Done".
More surprising is the idea that there isn´t any utopian-millenarian end goal of the revolutionary struggle. Rather, human history is cyclical and it seems that the cycles are never-ending. While a "shudra revolution" can improve the situation considerably for a time, degeneration seems to be inevitable, necessitating a new rebellion of the shudras in the future. I suppose this could be losely based on the Maoist idea of cultural revolutions, but it´s also possible that it really is an innovation of Anandamurti´s. It gives his message a "fascist" tenor, with existence being a never-ending violent struggle, the only solution to which is presumably liberation and a return to Shiva.
Maybe it wasn´t Crovetto´s intention, but I certainly didn´t get a more positive view of the Path of Bliss after reading her article...
No comments:
Post a Comment